The concept of palliative care for incurable patients in jurisprudential point of view

Introduction:In the science of jurisprudence, identifying the problem is of particular importance; which is followed by the Sharia ruling(Fatwa). Therefor understanding the issue is one of the main concerns of jurists. One of the emerging problems in medical jurisprudence is "palliative care". It is a new approach in medical care to improve the quality of life for incurable patients. Jurists need to understand its domain and scope correctly to determine its legitimacy. This article discusses the palliative care from the Imamieh jurisprudential view, to determine if there is any conflict between palliative care and "jurisprudential laws".Materials and Methods:Data were collected by searching in the web and real libraries; and analyzed by descriptive-analytical method. Thus, palliative care activities were explained; and its difference with euthanasia was pointed out. In jurisprudential understanding issue of palliative care, the authority of decision-making was mentioned with the rule of "self-sovereignty". Besides palliative care position toward interrelated jurisprudential rules such as "self-preservation, "no harm" and "Denial of hardship" was analyzed. Then the priorities between palliative care and life-prolonging care were rationalized with jurisprudential rules.Conclusion: Palliative care isn’t in conflict with any of rules of jurisprudence. The main purpose in euthanasia is to hasten death, which is an act against self-preservation; but it is excluded in palliative care. According to the rule of the sovereignty over the soul, the decision-maker of palliative care is the patient. Life-prolonging care is more compatible with the rule of "self-preservation" while palliative care is more apprehensible with the rules of "No-harm" and "Denial-of-hardship". patients may choose the type of care based on the importance of life expectancy or life quality.