There has been a recent flurry of judicial and legislative activity in the realm of end-of-life decision-making, particularly around decisions to provide, or deny, life-supporting treatment to critically ill patients who are not capable of expressing their wishes. This book will focus upon decisions to withhold or withdraw life-supporting treatment from incompetent patients. The book offers a critical examination of the latest developments such as the Mental Capacity Act 2005, alongside more familiar principles such as the "best interests" standard, with a view to developing a new framework for resolving disputes in the clinic that is not only theoretically robust but also practically relevant. Key questions addressed by the book include: Which legal and ethical principles ought to guide health care professionals in deciding whether or not to provide life-supporting treatment to an incompetent patient? Who should have a say over whether or not treatment is provided, and whose voice -- if anyone's -- ought to be loudest? What mechanisms ought to be in place for resolving disputes and disagreements when they arise in end-of-life care?
What role can and should clinical ethics committees play in these decisions? This book will be of interest to students and scholars in the fields of health care law, bioethics, jurisprudence, applied ethics, theology, and policy studies, as well as health professionals and members of clinical ethics committees.