Prolonging Life
Fletcher, George P.
Citation analytics
How this journal article sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.
Most recently cited by1
- 1975In re Quinlan N.J. Super. Ct. Ch. Div.
Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.
Abstract
A physician decides not to prolong the life of a terminal patient. What are the legal consequences? Is it murder, akin to a gunman's pulling the trigger? Or is the law more sensitive?
Professor Fletcher proposes that a decision to interrupt life-sustaining therapy, such as that to turn off a mechanical respirator, should be classified as an omission, not an act. He arrives at this conclusion by analyzing the common sense usages of "cause" and "permit." If the decision is an omission then the law must focus on the doctor-patient relationship to define legal consequences, allowing customary standards of the relationship to be the controlling criteria. Thus a heavy responsibility is placed on the medical profession to develop humane and sensitive standards for guiding decisions about prolonging life.