• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

姑息治疗与安乐死。德国的立场:德国医学总会关于晚期患者医疗护理的原则

Palliative care versus euthanasia. The German position: the German General Medical Council's principles for medical care of the terminally ill.

作者信息

Sahm S W

机构信息

Deutsche Klinik für Diagnostik, Wiesbaden, Germany.

出版信息

J Med Philos. 2000 Apr;25(2):195-219. doi: 10.1076/0360-5310(200004)25:2;1-O;FT195.

DOI:10.1076/0360-5310(200004)25:2;1-O;FT195
PMID:10833136
Abstract

In September 1998 the Bundesärztekammer, i.e., the German Medical Association, published new principles concerning terminal medical care. Even before publication, a draft of these principles was very controversial, and prompted intense public debate in the mass media. Despite some of the critics' suspicions that the principles prepared the way for liberalization of active euthanasia, euthanasia is unequivocally rejected in the principles. Physician-assisted suicide is considered to violate professional medical rules. In leaving aside some of the notions customarily used in the euthanasia debate, e.g., passive euthanasia, the principles emphasize the obligation of physicians to offer and the right of patients to receive palliative care. The principles explicitly list modalities of basic treatment that are indispensable in all cases, such as the obligation to satisfy hunger and thirst. This statement is meant to resolve the dispute on nutrition and hydration at the end of life, as it shifts the focus of care from maintaining physiological parameters to satisfying subjective needs. For patients in a persistent vegetative state, artificial feeding is held to be obligatory. Yet, the principles make reference to recent German jurisdiction which permit the stopping of artificial feeding if it is in accordance with the patient's presumed will. Additionally, the wording concerning this issue is found to remain unclear. Patients' autonomy is strengthened by explicitly welcoming advance directives as a means to ascertain patients' wills. The principles mark some changes compared to earlier documents. They deserve careful analysis and should be considered in the international debate on issues concerning the end of life.

摘要

1998年9月,德国医学协会(Bundesärztekammer)发布了关于临终医疗护理的新原则。甚至在发布之前,这些原则的草案就极具争议性,并在大众媒体上引发了激烈的公众辩论。尽管一些批评者怀疑这些原则为积极安乐死的自由化铺平了道路,但安乐死在这些原则中被明确拒绝。医生协助自杀被认为违反了专业医学规则。这些原则撇开了安乐死辩论中通常使用的一些概念,如被动安乐死,强调了医生提供姑息治疗的义务和患者接受姑息治疗的权利。原则明确列出了在所有情况下都不可或缺的基本治疗方式,比如满足饥饿和口渴的义务。这一表述旨在解决临终时关于营养和补水的争议,因为它将护理重点从维持生理参数转移到满足主观需求上。对于处于持续性植物状态的患者,人工喂食被认为是必须的。然而,这些原则参考了德国最近的司法裁决,即如果符合患者的推定意愿,可以停止人工喂食。此外,发现关于这个问题的措辞仍然不明确。通过明确欢迎预先指示作为确定患者意愿的一种方式,患者的自主权得到了加强。与早期文件相比,这些原则有一些变化。它们值得仔细分析,并且应该在关于生命终点问题的国际辩论中加以考虑。

相似文献

1
Palliative care versus euthanasia. The German position: the German General Medical Council's principles for medical care of the terminally ill.姑息治疗与安乐死。德国的立场:德国医学总会关于晚期患者医疗护理的原则
J Med Philos. 2000 Apr;25(2):195-219. doi: 10.1076/0360-5310(200004)25:2;1-O;FT195.
2
[Key ethic discussions in hospice/palliative care].[临终关怀/姑息治疗中的关键伦理讨论]
Acta Med Croatica. 2008 Dec;62(5):447-54.
3
[Medicine at life's end--the view of a palliative physician].[生命末期的医学——一位姑息治疗医生的观点]
MMW Fortschr Med. 2006 May 18;148(20):35-8.
4
[Withholding and withdrawing therapy--how does the physician make a decision?].[停止和撤销治疗——医生如何做出决策?]
Anasthesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther. 2009 May;44(5):380-4. doi: 10.1055/s-0029-1224785. Epub 2009 May 13.
5
Is euthanasia compatible with palliative care?安乐死与姑息治疗是否相容?
Singapore Med J. 1999 May;40(5):365-70.
6
[Improvement of palliative outpatient treatment of terminally ill cancer patients - SUPPORT as example - The ethically preferable alternative to euthanasia].[晚期癌症患者姑息门诊治疗的改善——以SUPPORT为例——安乐死在伦理上更可取的替代方案]
Anasthesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther. 2001 Sep;36(9):530-7. doi: 10.1055/s-2001-17256.
7
End-of-life, euthanasia, and assisted suicide: An update on the situation in France.临终关怀、安乐死与协助自杀:法国现状更新
Rev Neurol (Paris). 2016 Dec;172(12):719-724. doi: 10.1016/j.neurol.2016.09.007. Epub 2016 Oct 21.
8
[Terminal sedation: consultation with a second physician as is the case in euthanasia and assisted suicide].[临终镇静:如同安乐死和协助自杀的情况那样,与第二位医生进行会诊]
Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 2005 Feb 26;149(9):445-8.
9
Physician-assisted suicide, euthanasia, and Christian bioethics: moral controversy in Germany.医生协助自杀、安乐死与基督教生命伦理学:德国的道德争议
Christ Bioeth. 2003 Aug-Dec;9(2-3):273-83. doi: 10.1076/chbi.9.2.273.30279.
10
The dying patient act, 2005: Israeli innovative legislation.《2005年临终患者法案》:以色列的创新性立法。
Isr Med Assoc J. 2007 Jul;9(7):550-2.

引用本文的文献

1
Intricate decision making: ambivalences and barriers when fulfilling an advance directive.复杂的决策:执行预先指示时的矛盾心理与障碍
Patient Prefer Adherence. 2016 Aug 16;10:1583-9. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S109040. eCollection 2016.
2
Culture and end of life care: a scoping exercise in seven European countries.文化与临终关怀:七个欧洲国家的探索性研究。
PLoS One. 2012;7(4):e34188. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0034188. Epub 2012 Apr 3.
3
Doctor-cared dying instead of physician-assisted suicide: a perspective from Germany.医生关怀下的临终而非医生协助自杀:来自德国的观点。
Med Health Care Philos. 2010 Nov;13(4):371-81. doi: 10.1007/s11019-010-9266-z.
4
Would they follow what has been laid down? Cancer patients' and healthy controls' views on adherence to advance directives compared to medical staff.他们会遵循既定的规定吗?与医务人员相比,癌症患者和健康对照者对遵守预先指示的看法。
Med Health Care Philos. 2005;8(3):297-305. doi: 10.1007/s11019-005-2108-8.
5
Attitudes towards and barriers to writing advance directives amongst cancer patients, healthy controls, and medical staff.癌症患者、健康对照者及医务人员对预先医疗指示的态度和书写障碍。
J Med Ethics. 2005 Aug;31(8):437-40. doi: 10.1136/jme.2004.009605.
6
What are cancer patients' preferences about treatment at the end of life, and who should start talking about it? A comparison with healthy people and medical staff.癌症患者在生命末期对治疗有哪些偏好,又该由谁开启这一话题?与健康人群及医护人员的对比研究。
Support Care Cancer. 2005 Apr;13(4):206-14. doi: 10.1007/s00520-004-0725-z. Epub 2005 Jan 19.
7
Models of ethical consultation: the Frankfurt model.伦理咨询模式:法兰克福模式。
HEC Forum. 2001 Sep;13(3):281-93. doi: 10.1023/a:1011981516195.