Deficiencies and Missed Opportunities to Formulate Clinical Guidelines in Australia for Withholding or Withdrawing Life-Sustaining Treatment in Severely Disabled and Impaired Infants

4Citations
Citations of this article
32Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

This paper examines the few, but important legal and coronial cases concerning withdrawing or withholding life-sustaining treatment from severely disabled or critically impaired infants in Australia. Although sparse in number, the judgements should influence common clinical practices based on assessment of “best interests” but these have not yet been adopted. In particular, although courts have discounted assessment of “quality of life” as a legitimate component of determination of “best interests,” this remains a prominent component of clinical guidelines. In addition, this paper highlights the lack of uniform clinical guidelines available to medical professionals and parents in Australia when making end-of-life decisions for severely ill infants. Thus, it is argued here that there is a need for an overarching prescriptive uniform framework or set of guidelines in end-of-life decision-making for impaired infants. This would encourage greater transparency, consistency, and some degree of objectivity in an area that often appears subjective.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bhatia, N., & Tibballs, J. (2015). Deficiencies and Missed Opportunities to Formulate Clinical Guidelines in Australia for Withholding or Withdrawing Life-Sustaining Treatment in Severely Disabled and Impaired Infants. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry, 12(3), 449–459. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-014-9572-x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free