Ethical and Legal Aspects of Enteral Nutrition

European ethical and legal positions with regard to EN vary slightly from country to country but are based on a common tradition derived from Graeco Roman ideas, religious thought and events of the 20th century. The Hippocratic tradition is based on ‘beneficience’ (do good) and ‘non-maleficience’ (do no harm). Religious thinking is based upon the presumption of providing food and drink by whatever means unless burden outweighs benefit. The concept of ‘autonomy’ (the patients right to decide) arose following in the decades after the Second World War and is enshrined in Human Rights law. The competent patient has the right to participate in decision making and to refuse treatment although the doctor is not obliged to give treatment which he or she considers futile or against the patientʹs interests. The incompetent patient is protected by law. The fourth principle is that of ‘justice’ i.e. equal access to healthcare for all. The law regards withholding and withdrawing treatment as the same. It also defines the provision of food and drink by mouth as basic care and feeding by artificial means as a medical treatment. It requires doctors to act in the best interests of the patient. The full version of this article is available at www.espen.org.