Suppr超能文献

[限制延长生命的治疗:反映德国现行法律的实用指南]

[Limiting life-prolonging treatments: a practical guidance reflecting the current legislation in Germany].

作者信息

Marckmann G, Sandberger G, Wiesing U

机构信息

Institut für Ethik und Geschichte der Medizin, Universität Tübingen.

出版信息

Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2010 Mar;135(12):570-4. doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1249217. Epub 2010 Mar 16.

Abstract

From the general ethical and legal requirements of medical interventions it can be inferred when life-prolonging treatments can or should be limited: If the intervention has no benefit for the patient and/or the properly informed patient refuses to consent to the intervention. Two questions are especially challenging: When are medical interventions futile? And: How should decisions be made on behalf of incompetent patients? In accordance with prior high court rulings, the new Civil Law legislation in Germany provides three standards for proxy decision making: (1) the patients' written advance directive, (2) oral treatment preferences and substituted judgement, and (3) the patient's best interest. Thereby, (1) has priority over (2) and (2) has priority over (3). In addition, the article discusses conflicts between autonomy and well-being of the patient.

摘要

从医疗干预的一般伦理和法律要求中,可以推断出何时可以或应该限制延长生命的治疗:如果该干预对患者没有益处,和/或充分知情的患者拒绝同意该干预。有两个问题尤其具有挑战性:医疗干预何时是无效的?以及:应该如何代表无行为能力的患者做出决策?根据先前的高等法院裁决,德国新的民法立法为代理决策提供了三个标准:(1)患者的书面预先指示,(2)口头治疗偏好和替代判断,以及(3)患者的最大利益。因此,(1)优先于(2),(2)优先于(3)。此外,本文还讨论了患者自主权与福祉之间的冲突。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验