Abstract
This article examines the ethical issues involved in a recent decision of the Seoul Western District Court stating that a hospital in Seoul has an obligation to comply with a request made by the family of a 76-year-old female patient to remove the patient from the respirator on which she is dependent. This article defends the following claims concerning this court decision: 1) that removing the respirator from this patient is not a form of euthanasia; 2) that the removal of the respirator does not infringe the patient’s right to treatment; 3) that the free will of the patient may have been respected, even though there was no written consent; and 4) that the court’s decision does not acknowledge the right to death of the patient. The article also examines the concept of death with dignity, since the removal of a respirator that meaninglessly prolongs a patient’s life has implications for a dignified death. When treatment merely delays the time of death, it is more of a source of pain for the patient than it is a form of medical treatment. Hence it is inhumane. However, even in these cases “ordinary treatment” should not be neglected.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.