Final answer:
Ethically, withdrawing therapy is ceasing existing treatments, while withholding therapy is choosing not to start them; both decisions are complex and context-dependent, especially in severe health crises like Ebola.
Step-by-step explanation:
There is indeed an ethical distinction between withdrawing therapy and withholding therapy. Withdrawing therapy involves the cessation of medical treatments that are already being administered, whereas withholding therapy refers to the decision not to initiate a treatment or medical intervention. This distinction is ethically significant when considering end-of-life care, patient autonomy, and the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence. In the context of life-threatening conditions like Ebola, these decisions are even more complex, pitting the potential benefits of untested medication against the risks and ethical implications of their dose. Continuing with ineffective treatments can consume scarce resources and prolong suffering without adding quality of life, raising the question of justice and allocation of limited healthcare resources. Decisions regarding these ethical dilemmas often require consideration of factors like the patient's wishes, potential outcomes, quality of life, and the moral responsibilities of healthcare providers.