I was alerted to this story from a comment left by a reader.  There is a very emotional case causing controversy in Canada.  It revolves around a three-month old infant who suffered catastrophic  and irreversible brain damage during delivery.  The infant’s physicians want to remove the infant from the ventilator stating  that removing the child from the ventilator is medically reasonable, ethically responsible and appropriate.  The parent’s do not want their son Isaiah removed from life support, and sought a court order to stop the physicians from doing so.  According to the CBC-Canada news article, the case currently stands as follows :  “An Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench justice has ordered an Edmonton hospital not to remove a ventilator that is keeping a three-month-old infant alive until a court hearing can be held on his medical condition.”

This story illustrates the real life difficulties of “deciding” on futile care for any human being.  When the case involves an infant, it is even more emotionally and ethically challenging, since the infant can not speak for themselves.  So who should decide futile care?  Should it be the patient’s physicians who are keeping the patient alive with their treatments?  Should it be the patient’s family (in the above case the parents), who will bear the ultimate burden of either grief from the loss of the child, or burden from caring for a severely disabled child.  Or, should it be the courts supported by expert opinion and detached involvement?

In ethical cases like these, there is never a black or white, right or wrong answer.  What ever answer you feel is right, will be wrought with other ethical questions to follow.

RR