The medical provision of hydration and nutrition: Two very different outcomes in Victoria and Florida
Mendelson, Danuta and Ashby, Michael 2004, The medical provision of hydration and nutrition: Two very different outcomes in Victoria and Florida, Journal of law and medicine, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 282-291.
(Some files may be inaccessible until you login with your Deakin Research Online credentials)
Decisions to withhold or withdraw medical hydration and nutrition are amongst the most difficult that confront patients and their families, medical and other health professionals all over the world. This article discusses two cases relating to lawful withdrawal and withholding of a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube (PEG) from incompetent patients with no hope of recovery. Victoria and Florida have statutory frameworks that provide for advance directives, however in both Gardner; Re BWV and Schindler v Schiavo; Re Scliiavo the respective patients did not leave documented instructions. The article analyses the two cases and their outcomes from legal, medical and ethical perspectives.
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in Deakin Research Online is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.
Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO.
If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact firstname.lastname@example.org.