Is it permissible to remove the machines from a patient whose recovery is not expected?

The doctor: I ask a question regarding what was mentioned in the details of his speech, where he stated that it is possible to keep him alive medically for two or three days. The question here is that the patient is sometimes in a state where hope for his condition is nearly lost, so they begin to keep him alive through certain machines. These machines may continue for one month, two months, three, four, six months, and so on.

The Shaykh : And the doctor, a Dr., can add to it and keep him alive for a year or two.
The doctor: Three years.

The questioner : The doctors say that if we remove this machine, he will die; he will probably die. So, is it permissible in the Shari'ah to remove this machine in this case, or should they leave it, or what do they do?

The Shaykh : Is it permissible in the Shari'ah, what?

The questioner : To leave him in this state, between life and death, with this machine? Or do they remove the machine and leave the matter to Allah?

The Shaykh : If they put the machine in, they do not remove it. And the correct question is: do they put it in? Do they put the machine in?

The questioner : Neither of the two things, so it is not permissible to put it in. We understand one thing: first, it is not permissible to put it in in this case?

The Shaykh : I am telling you, in one of two possibilities regarding this type of patient, in my opinion, and the doctor is present, and as they say, "Ifta and you are in Madinah." And it is not for me to speak about what is not my specialty; therefore, we say that a case like this patient is not sufficient to be judged by one doctor. It is necessary to form a committee of doctors. If this committee is of the predominant opinion that these modern machines can save him from death, they put it in. And if they are of the predominant opinion that this will not save him from death, but will only let him live for a day, two days, a month, two months, and in the end he must breathe his last breath, then in this second possibility, they do not use the machines and let him die a natural death. So, the criterion is the predominant opinion.

The questioner : Okay, if this happens without them knowing the first ruling, and it turns out that they put this person under the machine, and then it becomes clear to them that if the machine is removed, this person will die, do they remove it?

The Shaykh : As long as it is the predominant opinion, yes, but they must do that beforehand.

The questioner : Meaning, they remove this machine and do not leave him suffering in this state.

The Shaykh: Yes.
Abu Layla : Meaning, Dr., you are now more reassured.
The doctor: Praise be to Allah.
Abu Layla : Subhan Allah, O our Shaykh, this morning when the story was recounted, I was not personally reassured by the fatwa.The Shaykh : Of Abd al-Rahman; because he is the specialist and he is treating him. I said he must have something, because he is treating him.

The questioner : Okay, meaning, the draining of these fluids, its cause is his obtaining this substance, the anesthetic substance.
The doctor: Removing the fluids from his stomach, it is a play and movements in his mouth that caused his vomiting.

The questioner : Meaning, you are the cause of his vomiting?
The doctor: Yes, yes.

The questioner : Meaning, if you had not played in his mouth, he would have remained in his state.
Doctor: He would have been in his state, bad, but he would have remained in his state.
The doctor: The issue is that if I tried to put the tube or the hose before the anesthesia, the amount of fluids was approximately three liters of arterial blood, naturally with other fluids from the effect of the previous operation.

The questioner : Meaning, the same result.
The doctor: Approximately, but we say that we performed the first step, and for example, we do not have a second option, whereas if we neglected this step, we moved to a second step.