School of Law, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL, UK.
Med Law Rev. 2020 Aug 1;28(3):573-594. doi: 10.1093/medlaw/fwaa011.
The concept of medical futility as an applied ethical framework has seen a rise and fall in its popularity over the last 30 years. It is a term used in relation to the assessment of a patient's health condition that is deemed untreatable, irreversible, and unresolvable. In four recent cases, Gard, Evans, Haastrup, and Raqeeb, the concept has been brought to the fore once again. These cases highlight a mounting tension between clinicians and families. Parental desires to see their child's treatment continued, while understandable, should not dominate treatment planning. This article analyses judicial interpretation of the factors which determine an assessment of futility and in doing so, argues that the role of medical futility in judicial decisions of this kind is gaining prominence and will continue to do so as scientific advancement blurs the limits of medicine even further.
作为一个应用伦理框架，医疗无效性的概念在过去 30 年中经历了兴衰。它是一个用于评估患者健康状况的术语，被认为是无法治疗、不可逆转和无法解决的。在最近的四个案例中，Gard、Evans、Haastrup 和 Raqeeb，这一概念再次被提上了议程。这些案例突出了临床医生和家庭之间日益紧张的关系。父母希望看到他们孩子的治疗继续进行，这是可以理解的，但不应主导治疗计划。本文分析了司法对决定无效性评估的因素的解释，认为在这种情况下，医疗无效性在司法决策中的作用越来越重要，并且随着科学的进步进一步模糊了医学的界限，这种作用将继续下去。
