Spike Jeffrey P
McGovern Center for Humanities and Ethics, University of Texas, Houston, USA.
J Clin Ethics. 2012 Spring;23(1):79-83.
Individuals who are profoundly mentally handicapped do not have the capacity to make their own decisions and also do not have a past record of decisions, from when they had capacity, to guide us in making decisions for them. They represent a difficult group, ethically, for surrogate decision making. Here I propose some guidelines, distinguishing between these patients and patients in a persistent vegetative state (PVS). As the life span of patients becomes shorter, or their level of consciousness becomes permanently impaired, the presumption for comfort care should become an imperative, and the standard of evidence to justify any invasive intervention should become higher. For members of this population, who have no more ability to refuse treatment than to consent to it, protection of the vulnerable must mean allowing a peaceful death as well as a comfortable life. Reasonable legal safeguards are also proposed to allow improved end-of-life decisions to be made for this population.
极重度智力障碍者没有能力自行做决定,而且也没有在具备做决定能力时所做决定的过往记录来指导我们为他们做决定。从伦理角度而言,他们是一个难以进行替代决策的群体。在此,我提出一些指导方针,以区分这类患者与持续性植物状态(PVS)患者。随着患者寿命缩短或意识水平永久性受损,给予舒适护理的推定应成为当务之急,而为任何侵入性干预提供正当理由的证据标准应更高。对于这一群体中的成员,他们拒绝治疗的能力与同意治疗的能力一样欠缺,保护弱势群体必然意味着既要让他们舒适地生活,也要让他们安详地离世。还提议采取合理的法律保障措施,以便能为这一群体做出更好的临终决定。