|
Dehydration of Another Patient Begins |
|
|
|
From ALERT.
Following the failure of zolpidem to revive a 53-year-old woman in a persistent vegetative state, the High Court has given permission for the removal of "life-sustaining care". (BBC, 6 December 2006). In reality this means she will now have food and fluids removed, and will be heavily sedated.
Once again the courts have failed in their duty of care to the vulnerable. A prolonged death through dehydration is not a "death with dignity". It is an agonising way to die, even when heavily sedated.
This woman was not dying. She may have been incapacitated and possibly unresponsive, but she did not have a life-threatening condition. She is owed the normal care that we give to those who are unable to look after themselves.
We need to recognise that a life dependent upon the care of others is not undignified. The intrinsic dignity of the individual should be inviolable. Removal of sustenance from a patient may clear a bed in a hospital, release resources in a cash-strapped NHS trust and liberate those who feel over-burdened, but it is not the action that a civilized society should countenance.
|