Coroner’s Report: Herman Krausz (Montreal)

Herman Krausz, a patient at the Jewish General Hospital in Montreal, died in 1998 after his respirator was removed. This withdrawing of life-sustaining treatment was done over the objections of his family.

The broader implications of an action such as this (removing life support against the patient’s or family’s wishes) can be seen when reading the recommendation of the coroner’s report issued after Herman Krausz’s death. The coroner stated that in circumstances such as these where families wish to continue life-sustaining measures while physicians and/or hospital administrations want to withdraw or withhold treatment, independent mediators should be appointed. The objective of this mediation process would be to facilitate a struggle in good faith between families and doctors so that a true consensus be reached regarding difficult medical decisions. ^[23]

There are many difficulties which might arise with regards to the implementation of a mediation process such as that proposed in the coroner’s report. Some of these challenges lie within the environment from which the concept of mediation itself arises. Mediators are, for the most part, trained in a mainstream of philosophy which does not necessarily take into account the perspectives of persons with disabilities who have traditionally been marginalized and whose perspectives have remained silent in our broader societies. Although the function of mediators is to remain neutral and to facilitate discussion between two dissenting parties, an unrecognized bias might exist because the mediators themselves would only perceive the situation from an “able-ist” standpoint. The Krausz situation can be seen as a case in point. According to Wesley J. Smith, an advocate for anti-euthanasia actions:

It was the very value of Herman Krausz’s life that the family and doctors disagreed about. [24]

Clearly this was not simply a medical decision, but one that also involved ethics. The hinge of the physician’s decisions was based on a determination of the “quality of life” of the patient, a topic that shall be discussed further in this paper.

---

23	For a more thorough discussion of the dynamics of this kind of mediation practice and the implications it might hold for persons with life-threatening illness, see Smith, Wesley, J. "Bio-ethics Stack the Deck Against 'Non-Persons.'" National Post. Toronto: February 25, 2000.
24	IBid.

Our Last Rights - Contents