9. The end of life

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jo Samanta ◽  
Ash Samanta
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Minimally Conscious State ◽  
Conscious State ◽  
Assisted Death ◽  
Essential Information ◽  
Sanctity Of Life ◽  
Mental Capacity Act

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter deals with key legal and ethical issues surrounding end-of-life decisions, with particular reference to physician-assisted death such as euthanasia. Suicide and assisted suicide, administration of pain relief, and futility are considered. Relevant legislation such as the Suicide Act 1961 (as amended by the Coroners and Justice Act 2009), the Human Rights Act 1998, and the Mental Capacity Act 2005 are discussed. The chapter examines several bioethical principles, including sanctity-of-life and quality-of-life debates; autonomy, beneficence, and medical paternalism; personhood, palliative care, and the double effect doctrine. Finally, it considers human rights issues, treatment requests, incompetent patients, and the concept of the minimally conscious state and locked-in syndrome. Recent cases are cited.

9. The end of life

2021 ◽  
pp. 156-176
Author(s):  
Jo Samanta ◽  
Ash Samanta
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Assisted Death ◽  
Sanctity Of Life ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Mental Capacity Act

This chapter deals with key legal and ethical issues surrounding end-of-life decisions, with particular reference to physician-assisted death, such as euthanasia. Suicide and assisted suicide, administration of pain relief, and futility are considered. Relevant legislation such as the Suicide Act 1961 (as amended by the Coroners and Justice Act 2009), the Human Rights Act 1998, and the Mental Capacity Act 2005 are discussed. The chapter examines several bioethical principles, including sanctity-of-life and quality-of-life debates; autonomy, beneficence, and medical paternalism; personhood, palliative care, and the double effect doctrine. Finally, it considers human rights issues, treatment requests, incompetent patients, prolonged disorders of consciousness, and locked-in syndrome. Recent cases are considered.

scholarly journals Verdighet og selvbestemmelse – En aktørbasert forestilling om menneskeverdet

2019 ◽  
pp. 191-213
Author(s):  
Sven Arntzen
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Moral Philosophy ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Rational Agent ◽  
Agent Based ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Absolute

Dignity, according to one conception, is the absolute, inherent and inalienable value of every person. There is general agreement that this idea of dignity has a source in Immanuel Kant’s moral philosophy. I argue that Kant formulates what I characterize as an agency or agent based conception of dignity. Persons are bearers of dignity in their capacity as moral subjects and subjects of action. Central here is the idea that a rational agent is the subject of “any end whatsoever” and so must be considered the free cause of actions. Accordingly, to be treated merely as a thing, or “as a means”, is to be treated in a manner incompatible with having and acting for the sake of any end of one’s choosing. Also relevant in this connection is Alan Gewirth’s agency based theories of dignity and of human rights. I then consider this conception of dignity in addressing three ethical issues: to let die or keep alive, assisted suicide, and so-called dwarf-tossing. Finally, I consider challenges to the idea of dignity in general and the agency based conception of dignity in particular.

Death with “dignity”: The wedge that divides the disability rights movement from the right to die movement

2011 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan M. Behuniak
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Personal Autonomy ◽  
Right To Die ◽  
Disability Rights ◽  
Physician Assisted Suicide ◽  
Death With Dignity ◽  
Assisted Death ◽  
A Value ◽  
The Right

Much of the American debate over physician assisted death (PAD) is framed as an ideological split between conservatives and liberals, pro life and pro choice advocates, and those who emphasize morality versus personal autonomy. Less examined, but no less relevant, is a split within the ranks of progressives—one that divides those supporting a right to die in the name of human rights from disability rights activists who invoke human rights to vehemently oppose euthanasia. This paper reviews how “dignity” serves both as a divisive wedge in this debate but also as a value that can span the divide between groups and open the way to productive discourse. Supporters of legalized euthanasia use “dignity” to express their position that some deaths might indeed be accelerated. At the same time, opponents adopt the concept to argue that physician assisted suicide stigmatizes life with a disability. To bridge this divide, the worldviews of two groups, Compassion & Choices and Not Dead Yet, are studied. The analysis concludes that the two organizations are more parallel than contrary—a finding that offers opportunities for dialogue and perhaps even advances in public policy.

scholarly journals Restorative Justice, Euthanasia, and Assisted Suicide: A New Arena for Restorative Justice and a New Path for End of Life Law and Policy in Canada

2011 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 965 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer J Llewellyn ◽  
Jocelyn Downie
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Restorative Justice ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Traditional Approach ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Assisted Death ◽  
Policy Debates ◽  
Law And Policy

This articles examines the current Canadian legal approach to euthanasia and assisted suicide, highlights some of the problems with it, and offers a novel alternative to the current traditionally criminalized prohibitive regime.  The authors first describe a restorative justice approach and explain the differences between such an approach and the traditional approach currently in use.  They then explain how a restorative justice approach could be implemented in the arena of assisted death, acknowledging the potential challenges in implementation.  The authors conclude that taking a restorative justice approach to euthanasia and assisted suicide could enable movement in the seeminly intractable public policy debates about these issues, lead to more effective and compassionate responses to cases of euthanasia and assisted suicide, and prompt policy and practice reform that enables society to better care for individuals at the end of life.

scholarly journals The restrictions of human rights – COVID-19 pandemic and ethical issue

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (154) ◽  
pp. 281-289
Author(s):  
Lukáš SIEGEL ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Theoretical Basis ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Vulnerable Groups ◽  
Political Decision ◽  
Essential Information ◽  
Ethical Implications ◽  
Philosophical Texts ◽  
Rights Issues

Purpose: The purpose of this article is to analyze some of the most significant ethical and human rights impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. The analysis aims to demonstrate the failures of many political decision that lead to restriction and limitation of human rights. Design/methodology/approach: We analyze various documents, reports and news articles that provide essential information about the different governmental restrictions that may lead to controversial human rights issues. We also use some philosophical texts to support our theoretical basis for the defence of human rights. Overall, we aim to find some of the groups that were vulnerable during COVID-19 pandemic and describe some of the human rights concerns and ethical issues. Social implications: We hope that our article will impact political regulations and restrictions that can have severe human rights implications. We also hope to inspire citizens, scientists and politicians to uphold and protect human rights and dignity during COVID-19 pandemic. Findings: In our article, we have found that many countries had problems with creating rules, restriction and regulations that are upholding and protecting human rights or did not have ethical implications. We have also found that many vulnerable groups were disadvantaged because regulations did not take into account their precarious position. Originality/value: We have analyzed the ongoing ethical and human rights problems with the COVID-19 pandemic because we believe that they present some of the most fundamental challenges to our society. Our analysis tries to demonstrate some of the most fundamental human rights issues and proposes to address these issues to avoid any future failures.

Death with “dignity”: The wedge that divides the disability rights movement from the right to die movement

2011 ◽  
Vol 30 (01) ◽  
pp. 17-32
Author(s):  
Susan M. Behuniak
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Personal Autonomy ◽  
Right To Die ◽  
Disability Rights ◽  
Physician Assisted Suicide ◽  
Death With Dignity ◽  
Assisted Death ◽  
A Value ◽  
The Right

Much of the American debate over physician assisted death (PAD) is framed as an ideological split between conservatives and liberals, pro life and pro choice advocates, and those who emphasize morality versus personal autonomy. Less examined, but no less relevant, is a split within the ranks of progressives—one that divides those supporting a right to die in the name of human rights from disability rights activists who invoke human rights to vehemently oppose euthanasia. This paper reviews how “dignity” serves both as a divisive wedge in this debate but also as a value that can span the divide between groups and open the way to productive discourse. Supporters of legalized euthanasia use “dignity” to express their position that some deaths might indeed be accelerated. At the same time, opponents adopt the concept to argue that physician assisted suicide stigmatizes life with a disability. To bridge this divide, the worldviews of two groups, Compassion & Choices and Not Dead Yet, are studied. The analysis concludes that the two organizations are more parallel than contrary—a finding that offers opportunities for dialogue and perhaps even advances in public policy.

Ethical Considerations of the Neurosurgical Patient

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Tolchin
Keyword(s):  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Vegetative State ◽  
Minimally Conscious State ◽  
Conscious State ◽  
Neurologically Impaired ◽  
Ethical Frameworks ◽  
Neurosurgical Patient ◽  
Surrogate Decision ◽  
Minimally Conscious ◽  
Injured Patients

Neurosurgeons, anesthesiologists, and other clinicians treating patients with neurological disorders can encounter a set of unusually difficult ethical issues, including especially questions about whether to initiate or continue neurosurgical or life-sustaining interventions for neurologically impaired patients. These questions are especially challenging because neurologically injured patients are often unable to make treatment decisions for themselves and because the prognosis for recovery is often uncertain. This article includes ethical frameworks for addressing these difficult questions. This review contains 5 tables, and 31 references.  Keywords: Bioethics, Autonomy, Beneficence, Justice, Informed consent, Surrogate decision making, Vegetative state, Minimally conscious state, Brain death, Organ donation

End of life decision making in healthcare in the prism of Council of Europe’s Human Rights Standards

2021 ◽  
Vol 2(24) ◽  
pp. 137-155
Author(s):  
Daria Bieńkowska
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Individual Autonomy ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Human Rights Standards ◽  
End Of Life Decision ◽  
Life Decision

The issue of decisions made at the end of life relating to the so-called “Right to death”, “death in dignity”, which in the literature on the subject is referred to as end-of-life decision making in the legal and medical space, arouses the interest of lawyers and doctors, and due to the specific gravity of the topic, it is also the subject of public debate. This article presents the issue of end-of-life decision making in health care in the light of the standards of the Council of Europe. The main purpose of the problem outlined in this way will be to analyze the legal admissibility of decisions concerning the end of life at the request of the interested person in the legal and human perspective. The summary indicates that despite the lack of a consensus in contemporary Europe as to the understanding of human rights, and hence the admissibility of active euthanasia and assisted suicide, the situation may change with the increasing emphasis on individual autonomy in medical law.

scholarly journals Are the Distinctions Drawn in the Debate about End-of-Life Decision Making “Principled”? If Not, How Much Does it Matter?

2012 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 66-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yale Kamisar
Keyword(s):  
End Of Life ◽  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Good Death ◽  
Physician Assisted Suicide ◽  
Death With Dignity ◽  
Assisted Death ◽  
Dying Patients ◽  
Aid In Dying ◽  
End Of Life Decision ◽  
Life Decision

I sometimes wonder whether some proponents of physician-assisted suicide (PAS) or physician-assisted death (PAD) think they own the copyright to such catchy phrases as “death with dignity” and “a good death” so that if you are against PAS or PAD, then you must be against a dignified death or a good death. If one removes the quotation marks around phrases like “aid-in-dying” or “compassionate care for the dying,” I am not opposed to such end-of-life care either. Indeed, how could anybody be against this type of care?I do not want to abandon dying patients anymore than Dr. Timothy Quill does. Although, unfortunately, it will not always be easy to achieve the desired result, I agree with him that it ought to be a goal of medicine “to help people die well, to help them receive a good death” — or at least “the best possible” death under the circumstances. I part company with Professor Quill, however, when he urges us to change the law in the majority of our states so that in some circumstances patients may achieve a “good death” or a “dignified” one by means of lethal drugs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document