ArticleMedicine, health care, and philosophy2016
Continuous deep sedation and homicide: an unsolved problem in law and professional morality.
Article in Medicine, health care, and philosophy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Palliative use of midazolam in acute geriatric units: a multicenter ambispective study.BMC geriatrics · 2025Article
- Cross-referencing French hematology teams' knowledge and perception of end-of-life situations: a national mixed-methods survey.BMC palliative care · 2025Article
- Evolution of European Resuscitation and End-of-Life Practices from 2015 to 2019: A Survey-Based Comparative Evaluation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- [Ethical implications in the therapeutic management of dehydrated patients at the end of life].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2021Review
- [Legal considerations in the care of patients with "terminal dehydration" in Germany].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2021Review
- Midazolam sedation in palliative medicine: retrospective study in a French center for cancer control.BMC palliative care · 2020Article
- ["Terminal" dehydration : Differential diagnosis and body of evidence].Medizinische Klinik, Intensivmedizin und Notfallmedizin · 2019Review
- How to manage terminal dehydration.Der Anaesthesist · 2019Review
- ["Terminal" dehydration, part 1 : Differential diagnosis and body of evidence].Der Anaesthesist · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When a severely suffering dying patient is deeply sedated, and this sedated condition is meant to continue until his death, the doctor involved often decides to abstain from artificially administering fluids. For this dual procedure almost all guidelines require that the patient should not have a life expectancy beyond a stipulated maximum of days (4-14). The reason obviously is that in case of a longer life-expectancy the patient may die from dehydration rather than from his lethal illness. But no guideline tells us how we should describe the dual procedure in case of a longer life-expectancy. Many arguments have been advanced why we should not consider it to be a form of homicide, that is, ending the life of the patient (with or without his request). I argue that none of these arguments, taken separately or jointly, is persuasive. When a commission, even one that is not itself life-shortening, foreseeably renders a person unable to undo the life-shortening effects of another, simultaneous omission, the commission and the omission together should be acknowledged to kill her. I discuss the legal and ethical implications of this conclusion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.