The medical provision of hydration and nutrition: Two very different outcomes in Victoria and Florida

Decisions to withhold or withdraw medical hydration and nutrition are amongst the most difficult that confront patients and their families, medical
and other health professionals all over the world. This article discusses two cases relating to lawful withdrawal and withholding of a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy tube (PEG) from incompetent patients with no hope of recovery. Victoria and Florida have statutory frameworks that provide for advance directives, however in both Gardner; Re BWV and Schindler v Schiavo; Re Scliiavo the respective patients did not leave documented instructions. The article analyses the two cases and their outcomes from legal, medical and ethical perspectives.