Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more infromation

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Nutrition in Clinical Practice
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Monturo, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Monturo, C.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Invited Reviews

The Artificial Nutrition Debate: Still an Issue... After All These Years

Cheryl Monturo, PhD, MBe, CRNP

From West Chester University, West Chester, Pennsylvania.

Correspondence: Address correspondence to: Cheryl Monturo, PhD, MBe, APRN, BC, West Chester University, College of Health Sciences, West Chester, PA 19383; e-mail: cmonturo{at}wcupa.edu.

Debate over withdrawal or withholding of artificial nutrition appeared a distant discussion until the furor over the Schiavo case and a Papal Allocation reignited this ethical dilemma. The purpose of this article is to provide a review of the bioethical opinion regarding artificial nutrition, as published in the Hastings Center Report from 1971 until 2007. A clinical and religious history of the evolution and use of artificial nutrition prefaces the review containing common themes and categories framed within a chronology of bioethical and legal events. Finally, an interpretative philosophical discussion is offered on the resurgence of the ethical dilemma concerning withdrawal or withholding of artificial nutrition. Through a combination of classic content analysis and grounded theory, 8 inductively derived categories emerged from a sample of 63 articles/letters with a primary focus on artificial nutrition, enteral nutrition or parenteral nutrition. These categories included illness/treatment trajectory, personhood, family, provider, cost, religion, legal, and ethics and morality. In more than 35 years, surprisingly little has changed with regard to withdrawal or withholding of artificial nutrition. As the Schiavo case revealed, despite a sense in bioethics of a firm consensus about handling the withdrawal of food and water, many are still searching for answers to this dilemma.

Key Words: enteral nutrition • symbolism • withholding treatment • bioethics

Nutrition in Clinical Practice, Vol. 24, No. 2, 206-213 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0884533609332089
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Nutr Clin PractHome page
R. Chernoff
Issues in Geriatric Nutrition
Nutr Clin Pract, April 1, 2009; 24(2): 176 - 178.
[Full Text] [PDF]