Department of Philosophy,University of Calgary, 2500 University Dr NW, Calgary, AB, Canada T2N 1N4.
J Med Ethics. 2013 Sep;39(9):551-2. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2012-100882. Epub 2013 Jan 2.
In the case of the minimally conscious patient M, the English Court of Protection ruled that it would be unlawful to withdraw artificial nutrition and hydration (ANH) from her. The Court reasoned that the sanctity of life was the determining factor and that it would not be in M's best interests for ANH to be withdrawn. This paper argues that the Court's reasoning is flawed and that continued ANH was not in this patient's best interests and thus should have been withdrawn.
在最小意识状态患者 M 的案例中，英国保护法院裁定，从她身上撤掉人工营养和水合（ANH）是非法的。法院的理由是生命的神圣性是决定性因素，撤掉 ANH 不符合 M 的最佳利益。本文认为，法院的推理存在缺陷，继续进行 ANH 不符合这位患者的最佳利益，因此应该被撤掉。
