Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T01:20:21.800Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Do the Right Thing: Samuel Linares and Defensive Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 April 2021

Norman Fost
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Let us start with a conclusion that seems not to be in dispute: that in April of 1989 Samuel Linares had little or no interest in living. He had been competently diagnosed as being in a persistent vegetative state, by then eight months long. The cause was clearly prolonged asphyxiation, so that whatever uncertainty exists in cases of unknown etiology was not a factor. It could also be claimed that he had little interest in dying, in that he was probably incapable of suffering from prolonged treatment. But few advocate prolonged intensive care for preservation of mere vegetative functions. Nor is there serious argument that patients or surrogates who request discontinuation of treatment in such circumstances, when it serves no interest of the patient, are acting immorally. Even the vitalist federal Baby Doe regulations concede that life-sustaining treatment may be discontinued when the patient is permanently comatose.

Type
Article
Information
Law, Medicine and Healthcare , Volume 17 , Issue 4 , Winter 1989 , pp. 330 - 334
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Child Abuse Amendments of 1984, Public Law 98–457, amending Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, 45 CFR 1340.151; Dept of Health and Human Services, Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention and Treatment Program, Final Rule. 45 CFR 1340; Federal Register 50:14873–14892, 1985.Google Scholar
Lantos, J.D. Miles, S.H. Cassel, C.K.. “The Linares Affair” Law, Medicine, and Health Care (this issue).Google Scholar
Holder, A., “Parents, courts and refusal of treatment,” J Ped 103:4:515–521, 1983 (Oct); Fost, N., “Parental control over children,” J Ped 103:4:571#572, 1983 (Oct).Google Scholar
Fost, N. Robertson, J.A., “Passive euthanasia of defective newborns: Legal considerations,” J Pediatrics 88:5:883–889,1976 (May).Google Scholar
Hand, L., in Repouille v United States 165 F2d 152 (2d Clr, 1947).6.Google Scholar
“The Linares Case” Hospital Ethics 5:4:11–14, 1989 (Jul).Google Scholar
Fost, N., “The new body-snatchers; Review/essay of Scott R, The Body as Property,” In Am Bar Fdn Res J 1983:718j–731 (Summer).Google Scholar
Weisbard, A., “Defensive law: A new perspective on informed consent,” Arch Int Med May: 860–861, 1986.Google Scholar
Relman, A.S., “The new medical industrial complex,” New Eng J Med 299:1012–14, 1980; Relman, A.S., “The future of medical practice,” Health Affairs Summer 5–19, 1983.Google Scholar
See note 6, supra.Google Scholar
Kopelman, L.M. Irons, T.G. Kopelman, A.E., “Neonatologists judge the “Baby Doe” regulation”. N Eng J Med 318:677–683, 1988.Google Scholar
Weil, W.B., “The Baby Doe regulations: Another view of change,” Hastings Center Report April: 12–13, 1986.Google Scholar
Moskop, J.C. Saldanha, R.L., “The Baby Doe rule: Still a threat,” Hastings Center Report April:8–14, 1986.Google Scholar
DHHS, supra note 1, at p. 14878Google Scholar
DHHS, supra note 1, at p. 14887Google Scholar
DHHS, supra note 1, at p. 14883Google Scholar
Lantos, supra note 2.Google Scholar
DHHS, supra note 1, at p. 14878, 14888.Google Scholar
DHHS, supra note 1 at p. 14888Google Scholar
Harrelson, G.I., Judge, In the matter of the welfare of Lance Tyler Steinhaus, County Court, Family Division, County of Redwood, State of Minnesota. Ammended findings of fact and order. Oct 13 , 1986. Original order, Sep 11 , 1986.Google Scholar
Lantos, et al. , supra note 2.Google Scholar
Fost, N., “Treatment of seriously ill and handicapped newborns,” Critical Care Clinics 2:1:149–151, 1986 (Jan).Google Scholar
Annas, G.J., “Denying the rights of the retarded: The Phillip Becker case,” Hastings Center Report 9:18, 1979.Google Scholar
Gross, R.H. et al. , “Early management and decision making for the treatment of myelomeningcocoele,” Pediatrics 72:450–458, 1983.Google Scholar
Lantos, and Miles, , supra note 2.Google Scholar
Greenstein, R. Fleming, G. et al. , report of U Conn/AAP survey of ICRCs.Google Scholar