Table 5.

Analysis of the decision-making criteria cited by the 31 doctors interviewed

Subsequent quality of life (n=22)	Defined by long-term living conditions, as predicted by the doctor (n=9), by the relationship between the child’s prognosis and the burden of the treatment (n=8), by the possibility of autonomy from the parents and of social insertion (n=4), by the possibility of a normal life without handicap (n=1)
Severe neurological handicap (n=21)	If it was severe enough to compromise the relationships the patient could establish (n=19), but not a valid reason for non-treatment if the child was well integrated into his family or social circle (n=2)
Consequences for the family (n=21)	Due to the intrusive nature of treatment (n=18), due the disease disrupting the affective links between the child and the family (n=3)
Severe extrarenal disease (n=17)	Such as cancers and incurable diseases (n=9) or severe handicaps or malformations (n=8)
Opinion of the family (n=15)	Only of value if the family was completely informed of all the medical findings concerning the child.
Renal insufficiency from birth (n=10)	Because this element affects the difficulty experienced when trying to manage intrusive treatments.
Social context (n=7)	Due to familial problems or a poor social and cultural level
Suffering of the child (n=7)	If it was resistant to major analgesic treatments
Survival unlikely (n=6)
Treatment failure (n=3)	With the most up to date scientific knowledge (n=2)
Financial cost (n=0)