{"title":"The topic of not initiating resuscitation from the perspective of Czech law not only in the context of palliative care.","authors":"David Bláha, Pavel Böhm","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the age of advanced modern medicine, prolonging the lives of patients is becoming easier and easier. Science is even going so far that some authors are beginning to see the need to advocate for the patient's right to die. The authors of the recommended resuscitation procedures themselves state that prolonging the inevitable dying process should be considered a harm (dysthanasia). The issue of not initiating urgent resuscitation is part of not only clinical practice, but also the study of physicians and other health professionals. The various criteria, indications, and contraindications for this action are repeatedly discussed in the course of study and practice, but rarely does this discussion go into significant detail. The teaching is limited to their enumeration or description of some of the more clearly understood ones, which are, for example, certain signs of death and their presence. The terminal stage of an incurable chronic disease is only marginally mentioned as a contraindication to urgent resuscitation, perhaps due to its ethical and legal overlap. The article includes an analysis of the sources of regulation of this issue, focusing mainly on legal and professional sources and their relationship. It also describes the actual process of decision making about the initiation of palliative care, decision making about end-of-life care, including the issue of not initiating urgent resuscitation.</p>","PeriodicalId":9645,"journal":{"name":"Casopis lekaru ceskych","volume":"163 4","pages":"137-142"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Casopis lekaru ceskych","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In the age of advanced modern medicine, prolonging the lives of patients is becoming easier and easier. Science is even going so far that some authors are beginning to see the need to advocate for the patient's right to die. The authors of the recommended resuscitation procedures themselves state that prolonging the inevitable dying process should be considered a harm (dysthanasia). The issue of not initiating urgent resuscitation is part of not only clinical practice, but also the study of physicians and other health professionals. The various criteria, indications, and contraindications for this action are repeatedly discussed in the course of study and practice, but rarely does this discussion go into significant detail. The teaching is limited to their enumeration or description of some of the more clearly understood ones, which are, for example, certain signs of death and their presence. The terminal stage of an incurable chronic disease is only marginally mentioned as a contraindication to urgent resuscitation, perhaps due to its ethical and legal overlap. The article includes an analysis of the sources of regulation of this issue, focusing mainly on legal and professional sources and their relationship. It also describes the actual process of decision making about the initiation of palliative care, decision making about end-of-life care, including the issue of not initiating urgent resuscitation.