RESUMO
Voluntary active euthanasia for adults at their explicit request has been legal in Belgium and the Netherlands since 2002. In those countries, acceptance of the practice for adults has been followed by acceptance of the practice for children. Opponents of euthanasia see this as a dangerous slippery slope. Proponents argue that euthanasia is sometimes ethically appropriate for minors and that, with proper safeguards, it should be legally available in appropriate circumstances for patients at any age. In this Ethics Rounds, we asked philosophers from the United States and the Netherlands, and a Dutch pediatrician, to discuss the ethics of legalizing euthanasia for children.
Assuntos
Eutanásia Ativa Voluntária/ética , Eutanásia Ativa Voluntária/legislação & jurisprudência , Adolescente , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Bélgica , Beneficência , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Humanos , Lactente , Países Baixos , Cuidados Paliativos/ética , Pais/psicologia , Autonomia Pessoal , Estados UnidosRESUMO
If we accept euthanasia for adults, should we also accept voluntary euthanasia for children? In 'Child Euthanasia: Should We Just Not Talk about It?', Luc Bovens answers this question affirmatively. Bovens examines five arguments against extending euthanasia to minors, the arguments being weightiness, capability of discernment, pressure, sensitivity and sufficient palliative care. He rejects each of these arguments. In this paper, I provide a rejoinder for each of his responses. I also critique his view that opponents of euthanasia have extra responsibility to promote palliative care. On the contrary, if euthanasia is legalised, advocates of euthanasia have a special obligation to promote improvements in palliative care.