Skip to main content
Contribution to Book
Withholding and Withdrawing Potentially Life-Sustaining Treatment: Who Should Decide?
Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press
  • Ben White, Queensland University of Technology - Faculty of Law
  • Lindy Willmott, Queensland University of Technology - Faculty of Law
  • Eliana Close, Queensland University of Technology - Faculty of Law
  • Jocelyn Downie, Dalhousie University - Schulich School of Law
Document Type
Book Chapter
Publication Date
1-1-2017
Keywords
  • Medical Futility,
  • Withholding and Withdrawing Life-Sustaining Treatment,
  • End of Life Decision-Making,
  • Regulatory Responses,
  • Regulatory Frameworks
Abstract

This chapter begins by considering the context in which disputes about life-sustaining treatment arise and the tensions and traumas they involve. Demographic and cultural shifts around how we die, evolving responses to the concept of ‘medical futility’ and difficulties in predicting death and in determining patient views and wishes all provide a context in which these decisions are made and disputes resolved. We then outline different possible regulatory responses to resolving these disputes before proposing a framework for how they should be regulated, based on values that we believe should be engaged when making decisions about potentially life-sustaining treatment.

Citation Information
"Withholding and Withdrawing Potentially Life-Sustaining Treatment: Who Should Decide?" in Ian Freckelton & Kerry Petersen, eds, Tensions and Traumas in Health Law (Alexandria, Australia: Federation Press, 2017).