A.) WORKSHOP READING MATERIAL

7.0 ETHICO-LEGAL ISSUES IN MEDICAL AND SURGICAL TECHNOLOGIES

7.1 Artificial Life Support

Legal definitions of terminal illness and death: Terminal illness is defined as illness from which recovery is not expected. The manner in which death is defined affects the ruling, hukm, about life support. Death can be defined using the traditional criteria of cardio-respiratory arrest. It can also be defined as brain death either higher brain death or death of the brain stem or whole brain death. If death is defined in the traditional way, life support cannot be withdrawn at any stage. If the definition of higher brain death is accepted, life support will be removed from persons who still have many life functions (like respiration, circulation, sensation). The question of quality of life is also raised in the definition of life. The assumption is that there must be some quality to human life for it to be worth living. The exact definition of quality is still elusive. It is argued that euthanasia saves the terminally ill from a painful and miserable death. This considers only those aspects of the death process that ordinary humans can perceive. We learn from the Qur'an that the death of non-believers is stressful in the spiritual sense. Believers can have a good death even if there is pain.

Palliative care: The aim of palliative care is pain control, psychological support, emotional support, and spiritual support. Death can be made a pleasant experience with appropriate palliative care. Palliative care was traditionally in the family but it has recently moved to institutions. Lessons about palliative care can be learned from the terminal illness of the prophet and his companions.

Principles of certainty and autonomy: When the definition of death and the exact time of its occurrence are still matters of dispute, a major irreversible decision like withdrawing life support cannot be taken. Islamic law strictly forbids action based on uncertainty, shakk.

The purposes of life and wealth: The purpose of preserving life may contradict the purpose of preserving wealth. Life comes before wealth in order of priorities. This however applies to expenditure on ordinary medical procedures and not heroic ones of doubtful value because that would be waste of wealth.

Legal rulings on initiating and withdrawing life support: The terminally ill patient, who takes a major risk, should make the final informed decisions after clarification of the medical, legal, and ethical issues by physicians and jurists, fuqaha. The family may request that life support be terminated if the patient is in pain or coma. Self-interest may motivate some members of the family and others with personal interest to hasten the legal death of the terminally ill patient. According to Islamic law, any inheritor who plays any role direct or indirect in the death of an inheritee cannot be an inheritor. It is therefore impossible for any member of the close family to take part in life support withdrawal decisions. Physicians and other health care givers may abuse withdrawal of life support and kill people for various motives.

7.2 Euthanasia

Concepts: Euthanasia is carried out illegally for patients in persistent vegetative states or those in terminal illness with a lot of pain and suffering. Active euthanasia, an act of commission that causes death, is taking some action that leads to death like a fatal injection. Passive euthanasia, an act of omission, is letting a person die by taking no action to maintain life. Terminal sedation with very high doses has the dual effect of controlling pain and causing respiratory failure. Islamic Law views all forms of euthanasia, active and passive, as homicide. Those who give advice and those who assist in any way with suicide are guilty of homicide. A physician is legally liable for any euthanasia actions performed even if instructed by the patient.

Analysis using purposes of the law, maqasid al shariat: Euthanasia violates the Purpose of the Law to preserve Life by taking life and it leads to cheapening human life making genocide more acceptable. It violates the purpose of religion by assuming Allah’s prerogative of causing death.

Analysis using principles of the law, qawaid al shari’at: According to the principle of intention, there is no distinction between active and passive euthanasia because the end-result is the same. The principle of injury makes euthanasia illegal because it tries to resolve the pain and suffering of terminal illness by causing a bigger injury which is killing. Continuation of pain in terminal illness is a lesser evil than euthanasia. According to the legal principle of sadd al dhari’at, prohibition of euthanasia closes the door to corrupt relatives and physicians killing patients for the sake of inheritance by claiming euthanasia. Euthanasia reverses the customary role of the physician as a preserver into a destroyer of life. A distinction in Law exists between withholding life support and withdrawing it. The issue is legally easier if life support is not started at all according to a pre-set policy and criteria. Once it is started, discontinuation raises legal or ethical issues. Continuation is easier that starting. Euthanasia like other controversial issues is better prevented than waiting to resolve its attendant problems. The patient cannot legally agree to termination of life because life belongs to Allah and humans are mere temporary custodians. The determination of ajal is in the hands of Allah. A patient who has legal competence, ahliyyat, makes final decisions about medical treatment and nutritional support. Patients in terminal illness often lose ahliyyat and cannot make decisions on their treatment. A living will is a non-binding recommendation and it can be reversed by the family. They however cannot make the decision for euthanasia.

General conclusions: Our analysis has shown that there is no legal basis for euthanasia. Physicians have not right to interfere with ajal that was fixed by Allah. Disease will take its natural course until death. Physicians for each individual patient do not know this course. It is therefore necessary that they concentrate on the quality of the remaining life and not reversal of death. Life support measures should be taken with the intention of quality in mind. Instead of discussing euthanasia, we should undertake research to find out how to make the remaining life of as high a quality as is possible. The most that can be done is not to undertake any heroic measures for a terminally ill patient. However ordinary medical care and nutrition cannot be stopped. This can best be achieved by the hospital having a clear and public policy on life support with clear admission criteria and application to all patients without regard for age, gender, socio-economic status, race, or diagnosis.

7.3 Solid Organ Transplantation

Background: The first organs involved in transplantations were the skin, the bone, the teeth, and the cornea. Later kidney, heart, lung, and liver transplants were achieved. Glandular and neurohumoral organs will be transplantable in the future. Transplantation decisions are a balance between risk and benefit. Ethical and legal problems of transplantation are temporary; they will disappear with the use of xenografts, artificial organs, and cloned organs.

Legal rulings about transplantation: Transplanting animal or artificial organs or auto-transplantation raise fewer ethical issues than transplantation from a donor. The evidence for transplantation from a human donor, living or dead, is by qiyaas with permission to eat flesh of a dead person in case of dharuurat. The main guide about transplantation is the purpose of maintaining life of the donor and the recipient. Under the principle of hardship, necessity and hardship legalize what would otherwise be objectionable or risky. Mutilation of a dead corpse is normally objectionable but where transplantation can preserve good health this objection is set aside. Under the principle of injury, lowering donor risk has precedence over benefit to the recipient. The complications and side-effects to the recipient must be a lesser harm than the original disease. Transplantation relieves an injury to the body in as far as is possible but its complications and side-effects should be of lesser degree than the original injury. Abuse of transplantation by abducting or assassinating people for their organs could lead to complete prohibition under the principles of dominance of public over individual interest. Prevention of harm has priority over getting a benefit and pre-empting evil. Under the principle of custom brain death fulfills the criteria of being a widespread, uniform, and predominant customary definition of death that is considered a valid custom. Selling organs could open the door to criminal commercial exploitation and may be forbidden under the purpose of maintaining life, the principle of preventing injury, the principle of closing the door to evil and the principle of preventing motive. Protecting innocent people from criminal exploitation is a public interest that has priority over the health interests of the organ recipient. The principle of motive will have to be invoked to forbid transplantation altogether if it is abused and is commercialized for individual benefit because the purpose will no longer be noble but selfish. Matters are to be judged by the underlying motive and not the outward appearances. Other considerations in transplantation are free informed consent, respect for the dignity of the human, ownership and sale of organs, taharat of the organs, sadaqat and iithaar of the organ donor.

Indications, side effects, and complications: The indications of transplantation are irreversible organ failure and sub-optimal organ function. Transplantation on the basis of preventive maintenance of organs in good condition is not allowed because the Law does not allow action based on uncertainty. The associated side effects and complications of immune suppression, infection, neoplasia, graft rejection, and drug toxicity are treated under 2 principles of the Law: hardship, mashaqqa, and injury, dharar.

7.4 Embryonic Stem Cell Transplantation

Description of stem cells: A stem cell is able to divide and replicate itself almost indefinitely and can be grown to produce a more specialized or differentiated cell. Some stem cells are already differentiated or specialized and can be grown to produce only specific specialized cells. Other stem cells are less specialized or differentiated and can be grown into a wide range of specific cell types. These are called multi-potent or pluripotent cells. The third type of stem cells is called totipotent. These are completely undifferentiated and can be grown into any cell type.

Sources of stem cells: Multipotent cells can be found in adult blood, adult bone marrow, and umbilical blood. They can also be derived from cancer tissues and from fetal cells and embryonic cells (either pre-implantation or post-implantation). Embryonic stem cells are totipotent. They are able to develop into any type of body cell or tissue. The nucleus of the stem cell can be removed and can be replaced by the nucleus of a patient who has a damaged tissue. The cell can grow into the desired tissue. Embryonic stem cells are more efficient than adult stem cells.

Diseases likely to be treated using embryonic stem cells: The following serious medical conditions are candidates for cure using stem cells: diabetes, stroke, spinal cord injury, and neurodegenerative disorders such as Parkinson's disease. Stem cells could be grafted at a site of spinal cord injury. Stem cells grafted in the pancreas could produce insulin that is deficient or lacking in diabetics.

Advantages of stem cells: Stem cells have two main advantages. They can be a source of tissue or organs thus helping overcome the shortage of organs for transplantation. Stem cells generated under the patient’s own genetic control will be fully immunologically compatible unlike donated organs that can be rejected by the patient.

Ethical controversy about embryonic stem cells: The use of adult stem cells or cells from the umbilical cord raises few ethical controversies. Embryonic stem cells, unlike adult stem cells, are a source of ethical controversy because they are obtained from embryonic tissue, either pre-implantation or post-implantation. Use of such tissue involves violation of the purpose of preserving life. Since the cell is a potential human life its use in research or transplantation involves denial of that life.

7.5 Cosmetic And Reconstructive Surgery

The concept of change of Allah’s creation: The Qur’an mentions stability of creation (30:30) and stability of Allah’s laws (35:43). The unchanging creation mentioned is constancy of the laws that govern the universe, sunan, as expounded in the Qur’an (35:43). Change is allowed if it follows the Laws. Any changes that do not follow these laws are repudiated. Desire to undertake reconstructive or cosmetic surgery arises out of dissatisfaction with defects and the associated embarrassing appearance. The defects are due to injuries that according to the principle of injury must be removed. Thus technology to remove or correct defects is not opposing or denying Allah’s creation. A serious issue of ‘aqidat would arise if a human were to be dissatisfied with Allah’s primary creation because it is optimal and perfect. Humans cannot conceptualize a better creation that they then prefer. Deliberate effort to change Allah’s primary creation without valid reasons is due to shaitan. There is risk in tampering with fitra without following the sunan.

Beautification: Allah made humans in a perfect image. He however also allowed them to enhance their physical appearance by wearing clothes, using perfumes. These measures improve appearance do not change fitra. Humans in disobedience undertake other forms of beautification that change basic fitra or do not follow the sunan. Prohibited procedures are tattooing, shortening teeth, widening gaps between teeth, and plucking eyebrows. Circumcision is an allowed procedure although it involves change of fitra. Male circumcision is mustahabb and is recommended on hygienic grounds. Opinions differ about female circumcision. Fraudulent procedures that are prohibited are wearing wigs, dyeing hair to hide age, and hymenal reconstruction. There are other forms of beautification. Increasing body weight and changing body shape by dieting is common and was practiced by women at the time of the prophet without objection.

Reconstructive/restorative surgery: Reconstructive/restorative surgery is carried out to correct natural deformities, deformities due to disease, and deformities due to complications of disease treatment. Malformations may be congenital or acquired. The distinction is not important because many of the congenital malformations are due to environmental factors operating in utero. The purposes of surgery on congenital malformations are: restoration of the normal appearance to relieve psychological pressure or embarrassment and restore function. These purposes do not involve change of fitra but restoration of fitra to its state before the injury. Similarly restorative surgery for deformities due to disease or treatment does not involve change of fitra since they are returning to the normal. Surgery for hiding identity of a witness is allowed. A surgical operation to reveal the true gender of an apparent hermaphrodite is not change of fitra but an attempt to restore fitra altered by hormonal or chromosomal damage. Such operations have another objective of trying to preserve or restore the reproductive function.

Cosmetic surgery: Cosmetic surgery has a sole purpose of enhancing beauty with no medical or surgical indication. It can fulfill the purpose of preserving progeny, hifdh al nasl, if carried out for beautification in order to find a marriage partner. Expensive cosmetic surgery violates the purpose of preserving wealth, hifdh al maal. It violated the principle of preservation of religion, hifdh al ddiin, if carried out with the belief that Allah’s creation was ugly. Under the principle of motive, qai’dat al qasd, we look at each individual case of cosmetic surgery and judge it based on the intention. As mentioned above a simple cosmetic surgery operation may lead to the noble purpose of marriage. We however must consider the benefits of cosmetic surgery against its harm under the principle of injury. The Law gives priority to prevention of injury over accruing a benefit. The principle of hardship cannot be applied to cosmetic surgery because there is no life-threatening situation necessity to justify putting aside normal prohibitions. Pursuit of beauty in not necessary for life and good health. Beauty is in any case a nebulous intangible entity that is very subjective.