| Sumario: | The article critically examines proposals by Wasserman et al. advocating for the abandonment of much existing law on the withdrawal and withholding of life-sustaining treatment, suggesting instead that clinical institutions or their internal protocols regulate such decisions. It highlights the legal presumption favoring the maintenance of life, which currently limits the influence of individual clinicians' conscience, especially in secular institutions, and argues that the authors’ emphasis on conscience risks undermining established legal and ethical frameworks. The article contends that prioritizing individual conscience over legal principles could lead to unreviewable clinical decisions that disregard patients’ interests and advance directives, posing significant practical and ethical challenges. It concludes that maintaining the current legal duty to preserve life, except in compelling circumstances unrelated to clinicians’ or institutions’ conscience, is essential.
|
|---|