Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Shifting the burden of proof.

D S Davis1

  • 1Cleveland-Marshall College of Law, Cleveland State University, OH.

Second Opinion (Park Ridge, Ill.)
|December 9, 1992
PubMed
Summary

Americans widely oppose artificial nutrition and hydration for persistent vegetative state patients. Public opinion suggests a need for a revised legal standard for removing life support, easing the burden of proof.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Review of quality of life studies in women with alopecia.

International journal of women's dermatology·2018
Same author

Financial security of urban retirees.

Journal of cross-cultural gerontology·2014
Same author

EXPERIMENTAL INFECTION OF COLLARED PECCARY ( Dicotyles tajacu angulatus ) WITH SWINE KIDNEY WORM ( Stephanurus dentatus ).

Journal of wildlife diseases·2013
Same author

Multiplexed imaging by means of optically generated Kronecker products: 1. The basic concept.

Applied optics·2010
Same author

Design for an all-reflection Michelson interferometer.

Applied optics·2010
Same author

Fermi gamma-ray imaging of a radio galaxy.

Science (New York, N.Y.)·2010

Area of Science:

  • Medical Law
  • Bioethics
  • Public Health Policy

Background:

  • Current legal standards for removing life support, particularly for patients in a persistent vegetative state (PVS), impose a high burden of proof.
  • This legal framework may not align with public sentiment regarding end-of-life care preferences.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the appropriateness of the current evidentiary standard for life support removal in PVS cases.
  • To explore the alignment between public opinion on artificial nutrition and hydration (ANH) and existing legal requirements.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of existing legal precedents regarding life support removal.
  • Review of public opinion poll data concerning patient preferences for ANH in PVS.

Main Results:

  • Public opinion polls indicate that a significant majority (up to 85%) of Americans do not desire ANH if they were in a PVS.
  • The current legal burden of proof for removing life support is substantial, even in PVS cases.

Conclusions:

  • The disparity between public preference and legal standards suggests a need for re-evaluation.
  • A modified evidentiary standard may be more appropriate to reflect societal values in end-of-life decision-making for PVS patients.
Keywords:
Death and EuthanasiaLegal Approach

Related Experiment Videos