1. Why did a hospital in Canada fight to remove 18 month-old Joseph Maraachli's assisted breathing tube?

2. Why did Joseph's parents fight to keep Joseph's assisted breathing tube, and then get him a tracheotomy?

3. How did a Canadian court rule when Joseph's parents fought the hospital's decision to take him off his assisted breathing tube?

4. How did Joseph's parents get help to carry out their wishes for their son?

5. If the Canadian doctors had removed the breathing tube as they wanted to do, Joseph would have died very soon. Why do you think the Canadian hospital was still opposed to his parents moving him to a U.S. hospital, saying it was against the advice of its medical staff? (from para. 9)

6. Joseph's parents wanted to move their son to a hospital in the U.S. for two reasons: to get a second opinion on his diagnosis, and to get doctors to perform a tracheotomy on Joseph so they could bring him home to die. Watch the videos under "Resources" below. Who do you think should have the final decision about a terminally ill patient: his family, or doctors/hospital? Explain your answer.

7. Rebecca Dresser, a professor of law and medical ethics at Washington University in St. Louis, said U.S. courts generally side with families in such cases that want to continue treatment for loved ones even in seemingly hopeless medical cases. Dresser said end-of-life cases similar to Joseph's in Canada will likely become more common as President Obama's new Health Care plan takes effect. She said "Because of the growing concerns about costs, we're going to see more of this." Americans opposed to the new Health Care law give this as one of their reasons for their opposition: people/families will increasingly lose control over healthcare: instead a government bureaucrat trying to keep costs down will be making decisions on who gets what health care. Ask a parent how he/she views this issue.