Fenwick A J
Department of Private Law, University of Edinburgh.
J Med Ethics. 1998 Apr;24(2):86-92. doi: 10.1136/jme.24.2.86.
"Best interests" is widely accepted as the appropriate foundation principle for medico-legal decisions concerning treatment withdrawal from patients in persistent vegetative state (PVS). Its application appears to progress logically from earlier use regarding legally incompetent patients. This author argues, however, that such confidence in the relevance of the principle of best interests to PVS is misplaced, and that current construction in this context is questionable on four specific grounds. Furthermore, it is argued that the resulting legal inconsistency is distorting both the principle itself and, more particularly, individual patient interests.
“最佳利益”被广泛认为是关于从持续性植物状态(PVS)患者身上撤掉治疗的医疗法律决策的适当基础原则。其应用似乎是从早期针对无法律行为能力患者的使用合理发展而来的。然而,本文作者认为,对最佳利益原则与PVS相关性的这种信心是错误的,并且在这种情况下目前的构建在四个具体方面存在问题。此外,有人认为由此产生的法律不一致正在扭曲该原则本身,更具体地说,正在扭曲个体患者的利益。