Abstract
The reality of current clinical practice in the UK is that where a patient's family refuses to agree to testing for brain stem death (BD), such cases will ultimately end up in court. This situation is true of both adults and children and reinforced by recent legal cases. While recourse to the courts might be regrettable in such tragic cases, if public trust in the medical diagnosis of BD is to be maintained all aspects of the process must be conducted in a way that is transparent and open to scrutiny. This is not an € ineffective expenditure' of resources, but an essential element of a human rights-compliant legal system.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 496-497 |
| Number of pages | 2 |
| Journal | Journal of Medical Ethics |
| Volume | 50 |
| Issue number | 7 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 21 Jun 2024 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
Keywords
- Death
- Human Rights
- Informed Consent
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Courts, rights and the critically brain-injured patient'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver