Suppr超能文献

致命性进行性疾病中的存在主义决策:法律和医疗框架的重要性有多大?

Existential decision-making in a fatal progressive disease: how much do legal and medical frameworks matter?

机构信息

Institute of the History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine, University of Ulm, Parkstraße 11, 89073, Ulm, Germany.

Institute Józefa Piłsudskiego Warszawie, University of Warsaw, Marymoncka 34, 00-968, Warsaw, Poland.

出版信息

BMC Palliat Care. 2017 Dec 28;16(1):80. doi: 10.1186/s12904-017-0252-6.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Healthcare legislation in European countries is similar in many respects. Most importantly, the framework of informed consent determines that physicians have the duty to provide detailed information about available therapeutic options and that patients have the right to refuse measures that contradict their personal values. However, when it comes to end-of-life decision-making a number of differences exist in the more specific regulations of individual countries. These differences and how they might nevertheless impact patient's choices will be addressed in the current debate.

MAIN TEXT

In this article we show how the legal and medical frameworks of Germany, Poland and Sweden differ with regard to end-of-life decisions for patients with a fatal progressive disease. Taking Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) as an example, we systematically compare clinical guidelines and healthcare law, pointing out the country-specific differences most relevant for existential decision-making. A fictional case report discusses the implications of these differences for a patient with ALS living in either of the three countries. Patients with ALS in Germany, Poland and Sweden are confronted with a similar spectrum of treatment options. However, the analysis of the normative frameworks shows that the conditions for making existential decisions differ considerably in Germany, Poland and Sweden. Specifically, these differences concern (1) the legal status of advance directives, (2) the conditions under which life-sustaining therapies are started or withheld, and (3) the legal regulations on assisted dying.

CONCLUSION

According to the presented data, regulations of terminating life-sustaining treatments and the framework of "informed consent" are quite differently understood and implemented in the legal setting of the three countries. It is possible, and even likely, that these differences in the legal and medical frameworks have a considerable influence on existential decisions of patients with ALS.

摘要

背景

欧洲国家的医疗保健立法在许多方面相似。最重要的是,知情同意框架决定了医生有义务提供有关可用治疗选择的详细信息,并且患者有权拒绝违背其个人价值观的措施。然而,在临终决策方面,个别国家的具体规定存在一些差异。当前的辩论将讨论这些差异以及它们如何影响患者的选择。

主要文本

本文展示了德国、波兰和瑞典在涉及患有致命进行性疾病的患者的临终决策方面的法律和医疗框架有何不同。以肌萎缩侧索硬化症(ALS)为例,我们系统地比较了临床指南和医疗保健法,指出了对生存决策最相关的国家特定差异。一个虚构的病例报告讨论了这些差异对居住在这三个国家之一的 ALS 患者的影响。德国、波兰和瑞典的 ALS 患者面临着类似的治疗选择范围。然而,规范框架的分析表明,德国、波兰和瑞典在进行生存决策的条件方面存在很大差异。具体而言,这些差异涉及 (1) 预先指示的法律地位,(2) 开始或停止维持生命治疗的条件,以及 (3) 协助死亡的法律规定。

结论

根据所提供的数据,终止维持生命治疗的规定和“知情同意”框架在这三个国家的法律背景下的理解和实施方式有很大不同。这些法律和医疗框架的差异很可能对 ALS 患者的生存决策产生相当大的影响。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9d7c/5745921/48bf4b08a72e/12904_2017_252_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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