{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03286978508217446, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0037926675094816687, 'mean_word_length': 5.092307692307692, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Withdrawal of Medically Administered Nutrition and Hydration: The Role of Benefits and Burdens, and of Parents and Ethics Committees

The ethical issues raised in the Michael Todd case were challenging, not only for the parents and clinicians, but also for members of the Ethics Consult Team and the Ethics Advisory Committee. In their presentations, Mello and Hobbs highlight a number of these issues, both substantive and procedural. While each is deserving of discussion, I will briefly comment on three: (1) the meaning of the terms “benefits” and “burdens” as applied to medically administered nutrition and hydration (MN&H), (2) the role of the Ethics Consult Team in the second consult, and (3) the role of the Ethics Advisory Committee when it was convened during the second consult.