Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 April 2021
When the Linares case broke in Chicago, the media immediately began contacting ethicists and hospital lawyers in the area. Eventually, and somewhat wistfully as one paper reported, they were unable to find a single ethicist who did not think that the decision should have been made to withdraw treatment from Samuel far earlier in his treatment. Furthermore, ethicists argued that the family and physician should have made that decision. There was no need to consult with lawyers and especially not with courts.
On the other hand, most lawyers contacted felt it was necessary to go to court to obtain permission to withdraw the respirator, since the legal status of such decisions in Illinois (as in most other states) was terribly unclear. Lack of “clarity” was a catchword in these interviews.
This dichotomy between the instinctive reactions of ethicists and lawyers is natural. It should be so. The ethicists consulted, philosophers, theologians, and physicians, are all skilled in clinical ethics.