Minooka Masako, Inaba Kazuto
Dept of Biomedical Ethics, School of Health Science and Nursing, The University of Tokyo Graduate School of Medicine.
Gan To Kagaku Ryoho. 2006 Dec;33 Suppl 2:267-9.
In Japan we have not reached an agreement on 'Withholding and Withdrawing Life-prolonging Treatment' among medical, bioethical and legal views. To achieve consensus on this issue, we should take several problems into consideration. They include: (1) Medical judgment; 'Is the patient in the end-stage of illness?' 'Is the futility of the treatment evident?' (2) Autonomy of the patient; 'Is the patient competent?' 'Is the Advanced Directive effective?' 'Is this the decision for the patient's best interest?' (3) Decision making by the family; 'Who is the most appropriate surrogate?' 'Does the decision reflect the patient's values?' or 'Is it for the patient's best interest?' (4) Procedural Justice; Enough communication, enough visibility and respecting the opinions by the third party are important to realize procedural justice. (5) To deliberate the difference between ethical and legal judgment, an interdisciplinary approach should be carried out. (6) To achieve consensus among the people, the importance of an Advanced-Directive should prevail widely.
在日本,我们尚未在医学、生命伦理和法律观点上就“ withholding and Withdrawing Life-prolonging Treatment”达成一致。为在这个问题上达成共识,我们应考虑几个问题。它们包括:(1)医学判断;“患者是否处于疾病末期?”“治疗的无效性是否明显?”(2)患者的自主权;“患者是否有行为能力?”“预先指示是否有效?”“这是否是符合患者最大利益的决定?”(3)家属的决策;“谁是最合适的替代决策者?”“该决定是否反映了患者的价值观?”或“这是否符合患者的最大利益?”(4)程序正义;充分的沟通、足够的透明度以及尊重第三方的意见对于实现程序正义很重要。(5)为探讨伦理判断和法律判断之间的差异,应采用跨学科方法。(6)为在民众中达成共识,预先指示的重要性应得到广泛普及。