Forgoing life-sustaining treatment - a comparative analysis of regulations in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and England

Background Regulations on forgoing life-sustaining treatment (LST) have developed in Asian countries including Japan, Korea and Taiwan. However, other countries are relatively unaware of these due to the language barrier. This article aims to describe and compare the relevant regulatory frameworks, using the (more familiar) situation in England as a point of reference. We undertook literature reviews to ascertain the legal and regulatory positions on forgoing LST in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and England. Main text Findings from a literature review are first presented to describe the development of the regulatory frameworks surrounding the option of forgoing LST in each country. Based on the findings from the four countries, we suggest five ethically important points, reflection on which should help to inform the further development of regulatory frameworks concerning end-of-life care in these countries and beyond. There should be reflection on: (1) the definition of - and reasons for defining - the 'terminal stage' and associated criteria for making such judgements; Korea and Taiwan limit forgoing LST to patients in this stage, but there are risks associated with defining this too narrowly or broadly; (2) foregoing LST for patients who arenotin this stage, as is allowed in Japan and England, because here too there are areas of controversy, including (in England) whether the law in this area does enough to respect the autonomy of (now) incapacitated patients; (3) whether 'foregoing' LST should encompass withholdingandwithdrawing treatment; this is also an ethically disputed area, particularly in the Asian countries we examine; (4) the family's role in end-of-life decision-making, particularly as, compared with England, the three Asian countries traditionally place a greater emphasis on families and communities than on individuals; and (5) decision-making with and for those incapacitated patients who lack families, surrogate decision-makers or ADs. Conclusion Comparison of, and reflection on, the different legal positions that obtain in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and England should prove informative and we particularly invite reflection on five areas, in the hope the ensuing discussions will help to establish better end-of-life regulatory frameworks in these countries and elsewhere.11Nsciessciscopu

Biomedical Ethics Policy in Korea: Characteristics and Historical Development

Ethical consideration is an inseparable part of policy-making in modern society. Biomedical ethics is an interdisciplinary study of ethical issues that result from advances in medical practices and research. Because these issues often arise at the bedside, society must provide solutions or judgments that are effective and applicable. Thus, the development and progress of biomedical ethics has been made possible via the cooperation of experts from diverse backgrounds. The biomedical ethics discourse should not be seen as a conflict between values but as a collective activity for problem-solving. To support this perspective on ethics discourse, a historical perspective on biomedical ethics in Korea was given emphasis on the participants and their perspectives. Major cases and the changes resulting therefrom were discussed with the agenda proposed. The Korean situation with respect to ethics development shows the interactions between groups participating in policy development and its collaborative nature

Humanitarian Responses and Their Ethical Implications

Abstract As the frequency and seriousness of natural disasters increase, humanitarian response gains interests. Disaster, as a threat to a society, exposes the weaknesses of that society and aids from agents other than that society are needed in the disaster situation. This nature of humanitarian response makes ethical consideration necessary, but as the context is different, ethical concerns and principles are also different from those of conventional medical ethics. Ethical justification is essential to humanitarian responses, and ethical standards and ideals should be considered during the humanitarian responses