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<br />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.