Patients receiving antibiotic therapy or nutritional support have a relatively high, but not necessarily predictable, chance of survival. Treatments whose goal is to control pain and suffering, even at the risk of hastening death, are regarded by many people as reasonable alternatives to aggressive life-sustaining medical treatment. Also there are legal and ethical uncertainties regarding when or how it may be appropriate to limit treatment. And separate from the question about what the decision should be are serious questions about how the decision should be reached. There is an important need for education of the public and health care providers regarding the nature and appropriate use of life-sustaining technologies.
Many people believe that life, whatever the quality, is sacrosanct.
Under this view, the possibility of sustaining life justifies, or even dictates, the use of all potentially effective means. In contrast, many other people believe that the present and expected future quality of life are valid, even essential, considerations indecisions about whether or not to apply life-sustaining treatments. Caregivers Caring for critically ill, terminally ill, or severely debilitated patients who may be treated with life-sustaining technologies is demanding and highly stressful for health care providers. In addition to the emotional load of dealing with very ill patients and grieving relatives, health professionals are constantly reminded of their own mortality and their fallibility. Emotional detachment from patients, avoidance of patients' families, and overuse of technologies are not uncommon responses.