Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 14 de 14
Filter
1.
BMC Med Ethics ; 21(1): 41, 2020 05 14.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32410605

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Euthanasia can be thought of as being either active or passive; but the precise definition of "passive euthanasia" is not always clear. Though all passive euthanasia involves the withholding of life-sustaining treatment, there would appear to be some disagreement about whether all such withholding should be seen as passive euthanasia. MAIN TEXT: At the core of the disagreement is the question of the importance of an intention to bring about death: must one intend to bring about the death of the patient in order for withholding treatment to count as passive euthanasia, as some sources would indicate, or does withholding in which death is merely foreseen belong to that category? We may expect that this unclarity would be important in medical practice, in law, and in policy. The idea that withholding life-sustaining treatment is passive euthanasia is traced to James Rachels's arguments, which lend themselves to the claim that passive euthanasia does not require intention to end life. Yet the argument here is that Rachels's arguments are flawed, and we have good reasons to think that intention is important in understanding the moral nature of actions. As such, we should reject any understanding of passive euthanasia that does not pay attention to intent. SHORT CONCLUSION: James Rachels's work on active and passive euthanasia has been immensely influential; but this is an influence that we ought to resist.


Subject(s)
Euthanasia, Passive , Euthanasia , Euthanasia, Active , Euthanasia, Active, Voluntary , Humans , Intention , Withholding Treatment
2.
Am J Bioeth ; 19(3): 21-28, 2019 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30896352

ABSTRACT

If a doctor is trying to decide whether or not to provide a medical treatment, does it matter ethically whether that treatment has already been started? Health professionals sometimes find it harder to stop a treatment (withdraw) than to refrain from starting the treatment (withhold). But does that feeling correspond to an ethical difference? In this article, we defend equivalence-the view that withholding and withdrawal of treatment are ethically equivalent when all other factors are equal. We argue that preference for withholding over withdrawal could represent a form of cognitive bias-withdrawal aversion. Nevertheless, we consider whether there could be circumstances in which there is a moral difference. We identify four examples of conditional nonequivalence. Finally, we reflect on the moral significance of diverging intuitions and the implications for policy. We propose a set of practical strategies for helping to reduce bias in end-of-life decision making, including the equivalence test.


Subject(s)
Clinical Decision-Making/ethics , Critical Care/ethics , Critical Care/psychology , Ethics, Medical , Health Personnel/psychology , Withholding Treatment/ethics , Humans , Morals , Withholding Treatment/legislation & jurisprudence
3.
Dev World Bioeth ; 18(2): 190-197, 2018 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29446214

ABSTRACT

Euthanasia and assisted dying are illegal in India according to Sections 306 and 309 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and Article 21 of the Constitution of India. There have been a number of cases where the Indian High Courts and Indian Supreme Court issued differing verdicts concerning the right to life and the right to die. Nevertheless, on 7 March 2011, a paradigm shift happened as a result of the Indian Supreme Court's judgment on involuntary passive euthanasia in the case of Aruna Shanbaug. In its judgment, the Supreme Court requested the government to prepare a law on euthanasia. Accordingly, the 241st Report of the Law Commission of India proposed a bill to permit passive euthanasia. In May 2016 the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (MOHFW) issued the draft bill for public comment in order to create an informed decision. The Indian people are divided on the issue of euthanasia. The majority of the scientific community welcome it, while some religious groups oppose it. Hindus, in general, express both supporting and opposing views on euthanasia, whereas, Christians and Muslims have hardened their opposition against it. The Supreme Court judgment and the Report of the Law Commission pave the way for the development of new policies pertaining to passive euthanasia by the central government of India. Once such legislation is passed, passive euthanasia may, and probably will, have an enormous impact on the cultural, political, public and medical spheres of India in the near future.


Subject(s)
Euthanasia, Passive/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Policy/legislation & jurisprudence , Suicide, Assisted/legislation & jurisprudence , Dissent and Disputes , Euthanasia/legislation & jurisprudence , Human Rights , Humans , India , Legislation, Medical , Public Opinion , Religion
4.
Bioethics ; 30(9): 663-671, 2016 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27628037

ABSTRACT

The view that voluntary active euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide should be made available for terminal patients only is typically warranted by reference to the risks that the procedures are seen to involve. Though they would appear to involve similar risks, the commonly endorsed end-of-life practices referred to as passive euthanasia are available also for non-terminal patients. In this article, I assess whether there is good reason to believe that the risks in question would be bigger in the case of voluntary active euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide than in that of passive euthanasia. I propose that there is not. On that basis, I suggest that limiting access to voluntary active euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide to terminal patients only is not consistent with accepting the existing practices of passive euthanasia.


Subject(s)
Euthanasia, Active, Voluntary/ethics , Euthanasia, Passive , Euthanasia/ethics , Physicians/psychology , Suicide, Assisted/ethics , Euthanasia, Active , Humans
5.
Bioethics ; 30(4): 227-33, 2016 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26449985

ABSTRACT

Several authors have recently suggested that the suffering caused by mental illness could provide moral grounds for physician-assisted dying. Yet they typically require that psychiatric-assisted dying could come to question in the cases of autonomous, or rational, psychiatric patients only. Given that also non-autonomous psychiatric patients can sometimes suffer unbearably, this limitation appears questionable. In this article, I maintain that restricting psychiatric-assisted dying to autonomous, or rational, psychiatric patients would not be compatible with endorsing certain end-of-life practices commonly accepted in current medical ethics and law, practices often referred to as 'passive euthanasia'.


Subject(s)
Euthanasia, Passive/ethics , Mental Competency , Mental Disorders , Physicians/ethics , Psychiatry/ethics , Stress, Psychological , Suicide, Assisted/ethics , Ethics, Medical , Humans , Mental Competency/psychology , Mental Disorders/psychology , Morals , Personal Autonomy , Psychiatry/standards , Psychiatry/trends , Stress, Psychological/psychology
6.
Orv Hetil ; 157(5): 174-9, 2016 Jan 31.
Article in Hungarian | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26801362

ABSTRACT

The institution of active euthanasia has been legal in Colombia since 2015. In California, the regulation on physician-assisted suicide will come into effect on January 1, 2016. The legal institution of active euthanasia is not accepted under the law of the United States of America, however, physician-assisted suicide is accepted in an increasing number of member states. The related regulation in Oregon is imitated in other member states. In South America, Colombia is not the first country to legalize active euthanasia: active euthanasia has been legal in Uruguay since 1932. The North American legal tradition markedly differs from the South American one and both are incompatible with the Central European rule of law. In Hungary and in most European Union countries, solely the passive form of euthanasia is legal. In the Benelux countries, the active form of euthanasia is legal because the supranational law of the European Union does not prohibit it. Notwithstanding, European Union law does not prescribe legalization of either the active form of euthanasia, or the physician-assisted suicide.


Subject(s)
Euthanasia, Active/legislation & jurisprudence , Euthanasia, Active/statistics & numerical data , Homicide/legislation & jurisprudence , Human Rights/legislation & jurisprudence , Suicide, Assisted/legislation & jurisprudence , Suicide, Assisted/statistics & numerical data , California/epidemiology , Colombia/epidemiology , Humans , United States
7.
Indian J Palliat Care ; 21(3): 258-61, 2015.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26600691

ABSTRACT

Appropriate treatment limitations towards the end of life to reduce unwanted burdens require ethical clarity that is supported by appropriate legislation. The lack of knowledge of enabling legal provisions, physicians feel vulnerable to legal misinterpretation of treatment limiting decisions. In India the lack of societal awareness, inadequate exploration of the gray areas of bio-ethics and unambiguous legal position relating to terminal illness have resulted in poor quality end of life care. Much of the perceived vulnerability by the physician is attributable to insufficient knowledge and understanding of existing constitutional and legal position in India. While we await informed legal and legislative opinion, this paper highlights possible legal liabilities arising from treatment limitation decisions with available defense. It is hoped that such clarity would lead to more confident ethical decisions and improved end of life care for patients.

8.
Orv Hetil ; 155(27): 1057-62, 2014 Jul 06.
Article in Hungarian | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24974840

ABSTRACT

This article deals with the intentional distinction between murder of first degree and passive euthanasia. In Hungary, active euthanasia is considered to be a murder of first degree, whilst the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg and Switzerland have legalized the active form of mercy killing in Europe. The palliative terminal care, when e.g. giving pain-killer morphine to the patient, might result in decreasing the patient's life-span, and thus causing indirect euthanasia. However, the legal institution of living will exists in several counter-euthanasia countries. The living will allows future patients to express their decision in advance to refuse a life-sustaining treatment, e.g. in case of irreversible coma. The institution of living will exists in Germany and in Hungary too. Nevertheless, the formal criteria of living will make it hardly applicable. The patient ought to express his/her will before a notary public in advance, and he/she should hand it over when being hospitalized. If the patient is not able to present his/her living will to his/her doctor in the hospital, then his/her only hope remains that he/she has given a copy of the living will to the family doctor previously, and the family doctor will notify the hospital.


Subject(s)
Euthanasia, Passive , Living Wills , Terminal Care , Belgium , Euthanasia, Passive/ethics , Euthanasia, Passive/legislation & jurisprudence , Germany , Homicide , Humans , Hungary , Living Wills/ethics , Living Wills/legislation & jurisprudence , Luxembourg , Netherlands , Palliative Care/ethics , Palliative Care/methods , Suicide, Assisted/ethics , Suicide, Assisted/legislation & jurisprudence , Switzerland , Terminal Care/ethics , Terminal Care/legislation & jurisprudence
9.
Cureus ; 15(2): e34788, 2023 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36915850

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Euthanasia or mercy killing has remained as a matter of extensive debate and ethical conflicts in the scientific literature. Discussions on this theme have got legal, religious, political and philosophical ramifications. AIM OF THE STUDY: The present study aimed to assess the knowledge, attitude and practices of medical professionals in a tertiary care hospital. METHODS: After taking prior approval from the institutional ethics committee a structured questionnaire was prepared and distributed among 200 consenting medical professionals in a tertiary care centre in the North-Western region of India. RESULTS: 50% of the respondents said that they were sure of the existing regulation on euthanasia in India. When gender differences were considered a significant difference (p=0.0147) was found between the two sexes regarding the alternate decision maker for deciding euthanasia. It was observed that there was a significant difference(p=0.0055) between those with the age more than 30 years and aged less than 30 years regarding the type of euthanasia that is justifiable. DISCUSSION: In the present study, the percentage of doctors favouring euthanasia is higher than compared in previous studies. The view of euthanasia is highly variable in different studies. Even though passive euthanasia has been legalised recently, there is an apprehension that it might be misused.

10.
Handb Clin Neurol ; 191: 235-257, 2023.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36599511

ABSTRACT

Ethical challenges in medical decision making are commonly encountered by clinicians caring for patients afflicted by neurological injury or disease at the end of life (EOL). In many of these cases, there are conflicting opinions as to what is right and wrong originating from multiple sources. There is a particularly high prevalence of impaired patient judgment and decision-making capacity in this population that may result in a misrepresentation of their premorbid values and goals. Conflict may originate from a discordance between what is legal or from stakeholders who view and value life and existence differently from the patient, at times due to religious or cultural influences. Promotion of life, rather than preservation of existence, is the goal of many patients and the foundation on which palliative care is built. Those who provide EOL care, while being respectful of potential cultural, religious, and legal stakeholder perspectives, must at the same time recognize that these perspectives may conflict with the optimal ethical course to follow. In this chapter, we will attempt to review some of the more notable ethical challenges that may arise in the neurologically afflicted at the EOL. We will identify what we believe to be the most compelling ethical arguments both in support of and opposition to specific EOL issues. At the same time, we will consider how ethical analysis may be influenced by these legal, cultural, and religious considerations that commonly arise.


Subject(s)
Neurology , Suicide, Assisted , Terminal Care , Humans , Palliative Care , Death , Ethics, Medical
11.
BMJ Open ; 8(9): e020519, 2018 09 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30206075

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This study determined attitudes of four groups-Korean patients with cancer, their family caregivers, physicians and the general Korean population-towards five critical end-of-life (EOL) interventions-active pain control, withdrawal of futile life-sustaining treatment (LST), passive euthanasia, active euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. DESIGN AND SETTING: We enrolled 1001 patients with cancer and 1006 caregivers from 12 large hospitals in Korea, 1241 members of the general population and 928 physicians from each of the 12 hospitals and the Korean Medical Association. We analysed the associations of demographic factors, attitudes towards death and the important components of a 'good death' with critical interventions at EoL care. RESULTS: All participant groups strongly favoured active pain control and withdrawal of futile LST but differed in attitudes towards the other four EoL interventions. Physicians (98.9%) favoured passive euthanasia more than the other three groups. Lower proportions of the four groups favoured active euthanasia or PAS. Multiple logistic regression showed that education (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.77, 95% CI 1.33 to 2.36), caregiver role (aOR 1.67, 95% CI 1.34 to 2.08) and considering death as the ending of life (aOR 1.66, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.61) were associated with preference for active pain control. Attitudes towards death, including belief in being remembered (aOR 2.03, 95% CI 1.48 to 2.79) and feeling 'life was meaningful' (aOR 2.56, 95% CI 1.58 to 4.15) were both strong correlates of withdrawal of LST with the level of monthly income (aOR 2.56, 95% CI 1.58 to 4.15). Believing 'freedom from pain' negatively predicted preference for passive euthanasia (aOR 0.69, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.85). In addition, 'not being a burden to the family' was positively related to preferences for active euthanasia (aOR 1.62, 95% CI 1.39 to 1.90) and PAS (aOR 1.61, 95% CI 1.37 to 1.89). CONCLUSION: Groups differed in their attitudes towards the five EoL interventions, and those attitudes were significantly associated with various attitudes towards death.


Subject(s)
Attitude , Caregivers/psychology , Neoplasms/psychology , Physicians/psychology , Terminal Care/methods , Attitude to Death , Cross-Sectional Studies , Educational Status , Euthanasia, Active , Euthanasia, Passive , Female , Humans , Male , Medical Futility , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/therapy , Pain Management , Patient Preference , Republic of Korea , Suicide, Assisted , Withholding Treatment
12.
Iran J Public Health ; 46(2): 173-179, 2017 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28451551

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In the majority of countries, active direct euthanasia is a forbidden way of the deprivation of the patients' life, while its passive form is commonly accepted. This distinction between active and passive euthanasia has no justification, viewed through the prism of morality and ethics. Therefore, we focused on attention on the moral and ethical implications of the aforementioned medical procedures. METHODS: Data were obtained from the Clinical Hospital Center in Kragujevac, collected during the first half of the 2015. The research included 88 physicians: 57 male physicians (representing 77% of the sample) and 31 female physicians (23% of the sample). Due to the nature, subject and hypothesis of the research, the authors used descriptive method and the method of the theoretical content analysis. RESULTS: A slight majority of the physicians (56, 8%) believe that active euthanasia is ethically unacceptable, while 43, 2% is for another solution (35, 2% took a viewpoint that it is completely ethically acceptable, while the remaining 8% considered it ethically acceptable in certain cases). From the other side, 56, 8% of respondents answered negatively on the ethical acceptability of the physician-assisted suicide, while 33% of them opted for a completely ethic viewpoint of this procedure. Out of the remaining 10, 2% opted for the ethical acceptability in certain cases. CONCLUSION: Physicians in Serbia are divided on this issue, but a group that considers active euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide as ethically unacceptable is a bit more numerous.

13.
Adv Med Educ Pract ; 7: 165-70, 2016.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27051329

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders in Saudi Arabia were first regulated by a fatwa on a national level in 1988, one that excludes the patient and their families from decision making. Although the core of this policy is taken up by all hospitals in Saudi Arabia, there is no homogeneity in implementation. Here, we appraise what interns and residents know of these policies and their attitudes toward DNR. METHODS: Interns and residents in four major hospitals in Jeddah, King Abdulaziz University Hospital, National Guard Hospital, King Fahad General Hospital, and King Fahad Armed Forces Hospital, were given a questionnaire in English with four blocks of questions. RESULTS: A total of 140 questionnaires were included in our study. From these questionnaires, we conclude a lack of familiarity with DNR's policies and the fatwa and also a lack of understanding when it comes to treating DNR-labeled patients. The majority opinion was to include the patient in the decision-making process who is excluded according to the fatwa. Participants considered patients' dignity, religious concerns, and legal concerns to be important in considering resuscitation. CONCLUSION: We conclude a need to emphasize the issue of DNR and treatment of DNR patients in medical ethics classes in Saudi Arabia and put more effort to enact national DNR laws that include the patient in the decision-making process.

14.
Dolor ; 15(45): 26-32, sep. 2006.
Article in Spanish | LILACS | ID: lil-677745

ABSTRACT

El progreso de la ciencia médica y sus efectos sobre el ser humano encuentran en la muerte un límite ético a sus posibilidades. El progreso médico, en ocasiones, se opone a los derechos de los pacientes, apareciendo la eutanasia como uno de sus principales conflictos. La discusión bioética debe resolver el dilema sobre permitir o no la muerte de todo paciente terminal que así lo desee. Algunas legislaciones han permitido la eutanasia, basadas en la autonomía del paciente, cuando aparecen situaciones que no permiten una buena calidad de vida en pacientes que padecen enfermedades terminales. El propósito de este artículo es realizar un análisis acerca de la eutanasia con el objetivo de clarificar los conceptos, sus aspectos bioéticos y realizar un análisis del proyecto de ley que pretende aprobar la eutanasia en Chile, encontrándose en dicho proyecto muchas contradicciones dentro del mismo y en relación con la legislación chilena en general.


The progress of medical science and their effect on the human being find in the death the ethical limits to their possibilities. The medical science, sometimes, opposes to the patients rights, so appear the euthanasia like one of these principals' troubles. The bioethics discussion must to resolve the question about to permit the possibilities of death to all terminals patients who don't want to continue with their lives. Some legislation has permitted the euthanasia based on autonomy of the patients when some situation doesn't permit one well quality of life in patients with terminal illness. The purpose of this paper is to make an analysis about the euthanasia with the object to clarify some concepts, their bioethical aspects and to analyze the Chilean project of law which pretends to regulate the euthanasia, finding many contradictions inside the project and in their relation with the Chilean legislation in general.


Subject(s)
Humans , Right to Die/ethics , Right to Die/legislation & jurisprudence , Euthanasia/classification , Euthanasia/ethics , Euthanasia/legislation & jurisprudence , Euthanasia/psychology , Patient Rights/classification , Patient Rights/ethics , Patient Rights/legislation & jurisprudence , Bioethical Issues/legislation & jurisprudence , Suicide, Assisted/classification , Suicide, Assisted/legislation & jurisprudence , Suicide, Assisted/psychology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL