Commentary

likely to have exacerbated her hopelessness. This transmission of hopelessness and helplessness to spouse, family, other care-providers, and the community becomes a systemic problem necessitating a family-centered approach to care, usually supported by a well-functioning multidisciplinary team. Alas, care of this quality was not available to this patient or her family. Clearly, medical practitioners have a responsibility to monitor their personal attitudes to a patient and the clinical problem to ensure that they do not unwittingly transmit negative countertransference feelings in a harmful manner. The clinical experience observed during the brief life of the ROTI Act could be regarded as an experiment in which the legislation that supported the practice of euthanasia can be examined for its effectiveness. 4 This patient generated a range of ethical concerns regarding the nature and quality of her medical care. Her story demonstrated the inadequacy of the provisions of the ROTI Act and suggested that the vulnerable cannot be safely protected by such legislation.