Organ Donation After Assisted Suicide

2014 ◽  
Vol 98 (3) ◽  
pp. 252-253
Author(s):  
Elaine Chen
2014 ◽  
Vol 98 (3) ◽  
pp. 247-251 ◽  
Author(s):  
David M. Shaw

2021 ◽  
pp. medethics-2021-107498
Author(s):  
Zeljka Buturovic

Bollen et al, replying to my own article, describe, in great detail, administrative and logistical aspects of euthanasia approval and organ donation in the Netherlands. They seem to believe that no useful lessons can be drawn from experiences of related groups such as euthanasia patients (typically patients with cancer) who cannot donate organs; patients who chose assisted suicide as opposed to euthanasia; patients in intensive care units and their relatives and suicidal young people as if we can only learn about organ donation in euthanasia patients by studying this exact group and no other, no matter how closely related and obviously relevant. However, it is not only permissible but also absolutely essential to gather evidence that goes beyond immediate point of interest and carefully study groups that share important features with it. Also, groups eligible for euthanasia are constantly expanding, theoretically, legally and practically, and it would be irresponsible to not foresee what are likely future developments. Finally, myopic focus on the technicalities of the procedure misses psychological reality that drives decisions and behaviours and which rarely mimics administrative timelines. Patients proceeding through euthanasia pipeline already face substantial situational pressure and adding organ donation on top of it can make the whole process work as a commitment device. By allowing euthanasia patients to donate their organs, we are giving them additional reason to end their lives, thus creating an unbreakable connection between the two.


2007 ◽  
Vol 40 (21) ◽  
pp. 45
Author(s):  
Mary Ellen Schneider
Keyword(s):  

GeroPsych ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Sophie Gloeckler ◽  
Manuel Trachsel

Abstract. In Switzerland, assisted suicide (AS) may be granted on the basis of a psychiatric diagnosis. This pilot study explored the moral attitudes and beliefs of nurses regarding these practices through a quantitative survey of 38 psychiatric nurses. The pilot study, which serves to inform hypothesis development and future studies, showed that participating nurses supported AS and valued the reduction of suffering in patients with severe persistent mental illness. Findings were compared with those from a previously published study presenting the same questions to psychiatrists. The key differences between nurses’ responses and psychiatrists’ may reflect differences in the burden of responsibility, while similarities might capture shared values worth considering when determining treatment efforts. More information is needed to determine whether these initial findings represent nurses’ views more broadly.


Crisis ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 71-81
Author(s):  
Antonio Preti
Keyword(s):  

Crisis ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 109-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J Kelleher † ◽  
Derek Chambers ◽  
Paul Corcoran ◽  
Helen S Keeley ◽  
Eileen Williamson

The present paper examines the occurrence of matters relating to the ending of life, including active euthanasia, which is, technically speaking, illegal worldwide. Interest in this most controversial area is drawn from many varied sources, from legal and medical practitioners to religious and moral ethicists. In some countries, public interest has been mobilized into organizations that attempt to influence legislation relating to euthanasia. Despite the obvious international importance of euthanasia, very little is known about the extent of its practice, whether passive or active, voluntary or involuntary. This examination is based on questionnaires completed by 49 national representatives of the International Association for Suicide Prevention (IASP), dealing with legal and religious aspects of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, as well as suicide. A dichotomy between the law and medical practices relating to the end of life was uncovered by the results of the survey. In 12 of the 49 countries active euthanasia is said to occur while a general acceptance of passive euthanasia was reported to be widespread. Clearly, definition is crucial in making the distinction between active and passive euthanasia; otherwise, the entire concept may become distorted, and legal acceptance may become more widespread with the effect of broadening the category of individuals to whom euthanasia becomes an available option. The “slippery slope” argument is briefly considered.


Crisis ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 89-89
Author(s):  
Michael J. Kelleher
Keyword(s):  

Crisis ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 90-93 ◽  
Author(s):  
Herbert Hendin
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document