Should Terminal Sedation Be Expanded to Individuals Who Choose to Die Via the Voluntary Stopping of Eating and Drinking?

The voluntary stopping of eating and drinking (VSED) is a phenomenon whereby an individual with decision-making capacity chooses to cease eating and drinking with the intention of ending their own life. This is widely acknowledged as a lawful, albeit uncommon, end-of-life decision. It is now generally accepted that patients undertaking VSED should have access to appropriate palliative care, as per any other form of dying. However, it remains unclear whether terminal sedation (TS), the use of sedative drugs to treat intolerable symptoms at the end of life, should form part of this palliative care. In this paper, we explore and defend the use of TS in the management of VSED. We argue that TS is medically appropriate in the management of patients undertaking VSED who develop refractory delirium and have previously consented to TS. We further argue that, given the life expectancy window in cases of VSED, the appropriate use of sedation during this time does not hasten death and fits within the 2-week limit applied to traditional TS. We conclude that TS is medically and ethically appropriate in the management of VSED.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Bioethics
Published
2026-05-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.70127
Primary Topic
Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Should Terminal Sedation Be Expanded to Individuals Who Choose to Die Via the Voluntary Stopping of Eating and Drinking?

Bioethics
Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
article

Should Terminal Sedation Be Expanded to Individuals Who Choose to Die Via the Voluntary Stopping of Eating and Drinking?

article en

Abstract

The voluntary stopping of eating and drinking (VSED) is a phenomenon whereby an individual with decision-making capacity chooses to cease eating and drinking with the intention of ending their own life. This is widely acknowledged as a lawful, albeit uncommon, end-of-life decision. It is now generally accepted that patients undertaking VSED should have access to appropriate palliative care, as per any other form of dying. However, it remains unclear whether terminal sedation (TS), the use of sedative drugs to treat intolerable symptoms at the end of life, should form part of this palliative care. In this paper, we explore and defend the use of TS in the management of VSED. We argue that TS is medically appropriate in the management of patients undertaking VSED who develop refractory delirium and have previously consented to TS. We further argue that, given the life expectancy window in cases of VSED, the appropriate use of sedation during this time does not hasten death and fits within the 2-week limit applied to traditional TS. We conclude that TS is medically and ethically appropriate in the management of VSED.

Bioethics
The Royal Melbourne Hospital (AU), National University of Singapore (SG), John Radcliffe Hospital (GB), University of Oxford (GB), Monash Health (AU), Murdoch Children's Research Institute (AU), Monash University (AU)
Wellcome
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Should Terminal Sedation Be Expanded to Individuals Who Choose to Die Via the Voluntary Stopping of Eating and Drinking? · Bioethics (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS