Suing to Stay on Life Support
From an editorial in the Christian Science Monitor:
A man named Leslie Burke, who’s a patient in England, has thrown alegal challenge to Britain’s universal tax-supported healthcare system.The outcome could serve as a lesson for any nation with a strong orgrowing government role in personal healthcare.
Mr. Burke is mentally competent, but because his doctors say adebilitating condition might result in him needing food and waterthrough a tube, he sued the National Health Service (NHS) to guaranteethat it not withhold such care should he need it. He did not want to bedehydrated against his wishes. He won the first round. . . .
The Burke case has the potential to alter therelationship between patient and doctor not only in Britain, but in theUS as well, since a number of federal courts have cited internationalor foreign precedents when justifying decisions. And given the onset ofbaby-boomer retirement, Medicare may soon be forced to rationhealthcare in cases that doctors decide are “hopeless.” Medicarealready has strict rules on what it will pay for.
The Schiavo case challenged people to consider the meaning, purpose,and source of life. But, as the Burke case might do, it also reaffirmedthe right of individuals, or their legal proxies, to decide thetreatment that might or might not be applied in a case of severedisability.
British patients, if they can afford it, may always resort toprivate care. But if they can’t, Britain, and perhaps many othernations, must face the question of whether to keep paying for anylife-saving treatment, or simply ration such care.