This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Howard Brody, MD, PhD
Michigan State University East Lansing

JAMA. 1986;255(12):1571.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

Dr Black's editorial¹ on predicting the outcome from hypoxic-ischemic coma correctly notes that predictors of bleak prognosis pose important ethical implications and that some of the key ethical assumptions may remain implicit and unexamined if one moves too quickly from prognostic judgments to public policy decisions. I question, however, his suggestion that a consequentialist analysis lies specifically at the root of any decision that one should withhold life-prolonging treatment from an irreversibly comatose patient.

Consequentialist or utilitarian ethics are frequently contrasted to a deontological (rights- or duty-oriented) ethical approach. A fundamental deontological question therefore becomes what is required before one could be said to be the subject of rights and duties (since it is obvious that we should respect the rights of other normal human beings but that we should not worry about respecting the rights of trees and rocks). While opinions differ, one useful line of . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?