EUTHANASIA

Think ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (58) ◽  
pp. 93-102
Author(s):  
Lynne Bowyer

ABSTRACTIn this article I consider the impact of euthanasia/physician-assisted suicide on the way we live and the relationships we have. I argue that embracing the practice of assisted dying is a deficient form of care that will erode the respectful and responsible human bonds that hold us all well in community.

2016 ◽  
Vol 44 (5) ◽  
pp. 292-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marianne C Snijdewind ◽  
Donald G van Tol ◽  
Bregje D Onwuteaka-Philipsen ◽  
Dick L Willems

BackgroundSince the enactment of the euthanasia law in the Netherlands, there has been a lively public debate on assisted dying that may influence the way patients talk about euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (EAS) with their physicians and the way physicians experience the practice of EAS.AimTo show what developments physicians see in practice and how they perceive the influence of the public debate on the practice of EAS.MethodsWe conducted a secondary analysis of in-depth interviews with 28 Dutch physicians who had experience with a complex case of EAS. Respondents were recruited both by the network of physicians working for SCEN (Support and Consultation for Euthanasia in the Netherlands) as well as via a national questionnaire, wherein participating physicians could indicate their willingness to be interviewed.ResultsThree themes came up in analysing the interviews. First, the interviewed physicians experienced a change in what (family of) patients would expect from them: from a role as an involved caregiver to being the mere performer of EAS. Second, interviewees said that requests for EAS based on non-medical reasons came up more frequently and wondered if EAS was the right solution for these requests. Last, respondents had the impression that the standards of EAS are shifting and that the boundaries of the EAS regulation were stretched.ConclusionsThe perceived developments could make physicians less willing to consider a request for EAS. Our results also raise questions about the role of physicians and of EAS in society.


Author(s):  
G. T. Laurie ◽  
S. H. E. Harmon ◽  
E. S. Dove

This chapter discusses ethical and legal aspects of euthanasia and assisted dying. It first examines the non-voluntary termination of life, covering the relationship between medical treatment and assistance in dying as a matter of failure to treat, and the philosophical concept of ‘double effect’. The chapter then discusses activity and passivity in assisted dying; dying as an expression of patient autonomy; suicide and assisted suicide; physician-assisted suicide; and assisted dying in practice.


2000 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 407-410 ◽  
Author(s):  
ERNLÉ W.D. YOUNG

In brief compass, I will touch on three of the central ethical and public policy issues that divide those who are opposed to physician-assisted dying from those who are supportive of this practice. These are: (1) the moral distinction (if any) between actively hastening death and passively allowing to die; (2) how to interpret the Hippocratic tradition in medicine with respect to physician-assisted death; and (3) whether physician-assisted suicide can be effectively regulated. I shall summarize the arguments pro and con with respect to each issue, and also indicate my own position.


Author(s):  
Anne-Berit Ekström ◽  
Mikaela Luthman

The so-called Oregon model has been described as a more attractive and safer alternative for assisted dying than the controversial euthanasia laws in the Benelux countries. Many advocates of assisted dying believe that the Oregon model, which implies physician-assisted suicide, is better adapted to Swedish (Nordic) conditions. In order to be able to offer assisted dying according to the Oregon model, seven criteria must be met. In this chapter, we will analyse the criteria and examine whether the practices of the Oregon model meet them. Is it a safe model to help severely ill people from suffering during their very last stage of life? To what extent can the model guarantee security and justice for those involved? Finally, we want to investigate whether it can be a suitable model for the Nordic countries.


Author(s):  
Søren Holm

A proposal put forth in the Dutch Parliament suggests that anyone over the age of 75 should have a legally guaranteed right to physician-assisted suicide if they wish to die, unless the wish is the result of a mental illness. This chapter discusses three questions about the relationship between age and entitlement to assisted dying: 1) are there good reasons to introduce a purely age-determined criterion for a right to assisted dying; 2) would such an age criterion lead to problematic discrimination against the elderly, or alternatively to discrimination against people who are too young to meet the criterion; and 3) what is the relationship between an age criterion and a postulated duty to choose assisted dying in specific situations. The discussion of these three issues shows that there are no good reasons for introducing an age criterion for the right to die, that an age criterion is potentially discriminatory to both the elderly and the young, and that introducing an age criterion could lead to problematic pressure against vulnerable elderly people.


1996 ◽  
Vol 45 (6) ◽  
pp. 1151-1161
Author(s):  
Denis Cavanagh

The article deals with the impact of the so called “culture of death” on medical practice in United States (US). In fact, in America, while the pretence is being kept up on the importance of the Hippocratic oath and the evangelic benevolence of the Good Samaritan, the strategy of the secular humanists is to try to make these irrelevant in the twin interests of social convenience and fiscal security. This campaign has been quietly waged in the media, in the courts, in public schools and universities. According this strategy, the threats to human life are, namely, two: abortion and euthanasia. On the first issue, in US the situation is discouraging because the US Supreme Court rulings Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton in 1973, that have made abortion a woman’s choice for any reason in the first and second trimester and available with medical consultation for almost any reason in the third trimester of pregnancy. Regarding the euthanasia, the campaign strategy is following the same pattern as that used to legalize abortion: the Euthanasia Lobby is claiming that millions of people in America are suffering unbearable pain because of terminal illness and so ought to have the right to end their pain with physician- assisted suicide. On the contrary, the author assert that there is no right to destroy any human life or participate in its destruction and there is no good moral reason for abortion or euthanasia, including the physician-assisted suicide. Finally, the author think that it is vital that Catholic activists, allied with Christian church-going brethren, should resist with all the power they can muster to the “culture of death”.


2005 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 142-153
Author(s):  
Bryan Hilliard

Over the past decade or so, no issue in medical ethics or bioethics law has raised more concerns about federal intervention in the practice of medicine, about judicial attempts to craft health policy, or about the wisdom of public mandates directing specific health care initiatives than the issue of physician-assisted suicide. State voter referenda, lower and federal court cases (including two U.S. Supreme Court decisions), proposed legislation in both houses of Congress, and orders and determinations from agencies within the executive branch of two administrations are representative of the kinds of actions taken in the last ten years implicating medical care at the end of life. Whether the intent was to codify into law physician-assisted suicide, to deny a constitutional right of assisted suicide, or to make “easier” physicians' efforts to alleviate intractable suffering at the risk of hastening death, or to prohibit physician aid in dying altogether, the impact on the patient-doctor relationship and on our understanding of what constitutes dignified and humane care at the end of life is undeniable.


2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-13
Author(s):  
Maria Teresa Munoz Sastre ◽  
Karine Doudou ◽  
Anne-Lise Espitalier ◽  
Emilie Guyomard ◽  
Mailys Iturbide ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document