Can Withdrawal Of Life-Sustaining Treatment Be The Right Choice?Today, modern society is changing its view of death. As much as it is important to live well, it is also important to die well. As a result, opinions have recently begun to emerge that patients who do not have a healthy life should have the opportunity to withdraw life-sustaining treatment. As an extension, the law on the decision to withdraw life-sustaining treatment has been revised. Still, legal controversy has existed because the criteria are unclear whether the right to death should be given to patients entirely. It is not desirable to implement a life-sustaining decision under the circumstances that have failed to resolve the controversy, and there should be no compromise because the law exercises a direct right to life. The following are three key reasons for opposing the Act On Decisions On Life-Sustaining Treatment.First of all, if the patient is conscious and can express his or her intention to withdraw life-sustaining treatment on his or her own, he or she can stop treatment as an exercise of self-determination. However, it is unclear how the patient's true intention will be identified when unconscious. Furthermore, even if a patient makes a decision once, it can change at any time depending on the circumstances. However, the law cannot define the timing of a patient's decision accurately and there’s no legislation for the reversal of a patient's decision. This requires a more accurate standard of self-determination for life-sustaining treatment discontinuation. Because it is a life-related decision, legal protection should be installed to ensure that the patient's decision is not distorted in any case. For example, in ‘Act On Decisions On LST’, the law states that patients can say no and a treatment can be nullified until just before the treatment is implemented. If these are not preceded, act on decisions on life-sustaining treatment should not be enforced.Secondly, The criteria for determining ‘A Condition In Which There Is No Possibility Of Recovery' as defined in Chapter 2 of the Act On Decisions On Life-Sustaining Treatment are unclear. In other words, the immediate decision to withdraw life-sustaining treatment may not be equal to withdraw life-sustaining treatment in the future because it is not entirely reliable to judge whether it is possible to sacrifice by modern medicine. Even if this possibility is very remote, it should be banned from implementing Act On Decisions On Life-Sustaining Treatment if the possible exists. For instance, the only treatment for cancer was surgical resection in the past, but recently, it has been treated with radiation or immunotherapy. It was said that cancer cannot be cured if surgery cannot be done, but now it can be treated with a new treatment. As such, it seems that there is no cure at the moment and cannot be cured, but if it can be treated with a new treatment in the future, the patient's life-sustaining decision should also be considered carefully. Because it is irreversible for a patient who died on one choice to come back to life.Finally, withdrawal of life-sustaining treatment can be a major trauma for families who choose it. A paper that studied families of cancer patients found that they had psychological regrets about their decision to stop life-sustaining treatment. The regret of family comes from the choice they give up their loved ones. It was also found that low satisfaction with treatment decisions and poor health results were related to regretting treatment decisions. Therefore, even if they choose to withdraw life-sustaining treatment for the patient, you should be aware that the choice itself can be a great psychological regret for the family afterwards.The suspension of life-long medical care seems to be a good corporation, but it creates a society that seems to recommend 'well dying' rather than 'long-lived life' and makes it difficult to approach death objectively. The reason why the right to suspend life-sustaining treatment cannot be a human right is that it is difficult to recognize decisions made by unconscious patients as rights. Since future updated technologies can restore patients who are not currently viable, implementing life-saving decisions will only make them feel more relaxed about death. Finally, even if life-sustaining treatment is withdrawn for patients, it can bring psychological regret to the rest of the family. For this reason, it is not right to implement the Act On Decisions On Life-Sustaining Treatment immediately and more preparation is needed.
