TheWendlandCase — Withdrawing Life Support from Incompetent Patients Who Are Not Terminally Ill

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Many patients do not have formal plans about who should make end-of-life decisions for them if they become unable to make such decisions themselves. This Sounding Board article reviews the case of a man who had informal conversations with his wife and children about end-of-life care, but who had not made a formal statement about either his wishes or who should act in his interest if he were unable to do so. Head trauma received in an automobile accident resulted in substantial but not life-threatening neurologic impairment. In an important decision, the Supreme Court of California sided with the patient's mother, who wished to keep him alive, rather than with his wife and daughter, who wished not to replace a feeding tube. The authors review the case and its implications for end-of-life decisions.

This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit: