Abstract

The issue of ethical "limit" in treatments at the ending of life is addressed in this writing, following the debate in the National Committee of Bioethics and more recently the media uproar on the case of Alfie Evans. The controversy about the suspension of "heroic treatments" is examined, whether and when they are to be considered "excessive" and "not proportionate" in the patient's best interest. At the root of the dispute lies a different assessment about the role of the "subjective" (patient's ) point of view versus the "objective" scientific/medical criteria in identifying the suitable "proportionate" treatments. The "ethics of subjectivity" is advocated, as a limit to the invasiveness of the new life sustaining technologies.