Assignment: Advanced Healthcare Law and Bioethics
The Kentucky Supreme Court ruled in Woods v. Commonwealth that Kentucky's Living Will Directive, which allows a court-appointed guardian or other designated surrogate to remove a patient's life support systems, is constitutional. The patient in this case, Matthew Woods, had been placed on a ventilator after having a heart attack. It was generally agreed that he would never regain consciousness and would die in 2 to 10 years. After a recommendation of the hospital ethics committee, Woods's guardian at the time asked for approval to remove Woods's life support. The Kentucky Supreme Court affirmed an appeals court decision, holding that: (1) "If there is no guardian," but the family, physicians, and ethics committee all agree with the surrogate, there is no need to appoint a guardian; (2) "If there is a guardian" and all parties agree, there is no need for judicial approval; (3) "If there is disagreement," the parties may petition the courts.
Withdrawal of life support from a patient is prohibited absent clear and convincing evidence that the patient is permanently unconscious or in a persistent vegetative state and that withdrawing life support is in the patient's best interest.
Task
a) Discuss the ethical issues of this case.
b) Discuss under what circumstances an ethics committee should serve as a legal guardian.