scholarly journals Ethical and legal aspects of the right to die with dignity

2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 420-439
Author(s):  
Iva Golijan
Keyword(s):  
Contact Area ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Public Debate ◽  
Right To Die ◽  
Passive Euthanasia ◽  
Law And Politics ◽  
Personality Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
Active And Passive Euthanasia ◽  
Ethics Law

The issue of euthanasia presents a contact area of ethics, law, and politics. This text provides a contribution to the expert public debate on the introduction of euthanasia into Serbian legislation. It does so first by clarifies the term - euthanasia (as a right to die with dignity). Further, it considers the obligations of other persons that arise from this right and the conditions under which they present a restriction on personality rights. By citing examples from the fields of ethics and law, the text states that the distinction between active and passive euthanasia is in fact a product of inadequate deliberation during the implementation of this differentiation.

scholarly journals Ethics and legal aspects of the right to die with dignity

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 213-230
Author(s):  
Ivana Mirevska
Keyword(s):  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Right To Die ◽  
Passive Euthanasia ◽  
Personality Rights ◽  
Ethical Point ◽  
Desire To Die ◽  
The Right ◽  
Active And Passive Euthanasia

Euthanasia is in liaison with ethics and law. This paper, which aims to contribute to the expert public debate on the introduction of euthanasia into Serbian legislation, the term terminology - euthanasia (as the Right to Die with Dignity) is the first to have been terminologically clarified. Furthermore, the text considers the obligations of other persons, arising out of this right and under what conditions the obligations of other persons arising from the said right constitute a restriction of their personality rights. By citing examples in the field of ethics and law, the text notes that the distinction between active and passive euthanasia is in fact a product of inadequate thinking in the implementation of this distinction. Based on the ethical argumentation of the double effect, also the text points to the inadequacy of the ethical approach in the function of legal regulation of the problem of euthanasia. Using abundant literature, which, from the legal and ethical point of view, problematizes euthanasia, the author has come to conclusion that the right to dignity is a social value that needs to be lawfully formulated, so that possible abuses can be prevented - and at the same time avoiding burdening the burden of responsibility to other persons (whether or not these are subjects of the judiciary or medicine), who should implement the patient's desire to die with dignity. Also, the author sought to base this article on the belief that Serbian legislation should legally shape the conditions for active direct euthanasia.

Reflections on the Intriguing Issue of the Right to Die in Dignity

1995 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 677-701 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raphael Cohen-Almagor
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Patient ◽  
The United States ◽  
Right To Die ◽  
Passive Euthanasia ◽  
Form Of Life ◽  
Israeli Supreme Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Active And Passive Euthanasia

This study compares how four countries, the United States, Canada, Britain and Israel, conceive active and passive euthanasia and the right to die in dignity. I start the discussion by clarifying the scope of the analysis and by shedding light on the concepts of autonomy and dignity. Section II proceeds by drawing attention to the familiar distinction between active and passive euthanasia, reviewing the current legal positions in the United States, Canada and England. Section III addresses Ronald Dworkin's distinction between experiential and critical interests, and further contemplates the analogy he draws between the destruction of life and the destruction of masterpieces of art. The section continues by contrasting Dworkin's assertion that what we seek is life in earnest, not any form of life, with Leibowitz's view that human life is sacred. In this context I also refer to the recent Scheffer decision, the only ruling at this time by the Israeli Supreme Court on the issue of death with dignity. Section IV considers the Eyal case, involving an amyotrophic lateral sclerosis patient who expressed his wish not to be connected to a respirator. I assert that in such instances, the patients' autonomy would be sustained and their dignity better served by helping them die. It is not always true that keeping a person alive is to treat her best. In some situations we respect a person and her dignity when we help her cease living. My justification for helping such patients fulfill their request rests on the assumption that they freely and genuinely expressed their will to die, and that they persist in expressing that desire.

EUTHANASIA: AIMING TO KILL WITH A COUNTER FULL OF OPTIONS?

2021 ◽  
pp. 13-14
Author(s):  
Tusharindra Lal ◽  
Riya Kataria ◽  
Priyadarshee Pradhan
Keyword(s):  
Assisted Suicide ◽  
Medical Practitioner ◽  
Passive Euthanasia ◽  
Life And Death ◽  
Patient’S Autonomy ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The World ◽  
Meaningful Existence ◽  
The Right ◽  
Active And Passive Euthanasia

Euthanasia or assisted suicide has been a matter of contention for many years with various types of euthanasia including voluntary, non-voluntary, involuntary, active and passive euthanasia being argued for around the world. This article highlights the types of euthanasia while analyzing the ethical, legal, economical and spiritual dilemmas surrounding them. It also compares euthanasia laws of countries around the world with the Indian stand taken by the Supreme Court in legalizing passive euthanasia. There exists a ne line between life and death. It is the duty of a medical practitioner to assess these situations critically while preserving a patient's autonomy. To deny a person the right to end their life with dignity is equivalent to depriving them of a meaningful existence.

A Scale to Assess Attitudes toward Euthanasia

2005 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 229-237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Wasserman ◽  
Jeffrey Michael Clair ◽  
Ferris J. Ritchey
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Research ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Severe Pain ◽  
Public Debate ◽  
Sample Variance ◽  
Passive Euthanasia ◽  
Cronbach's Alpha ◽  
Patient’S Autonomy ◽  
External Consistency ◽  
Active And Passive Euthanasia

The topic of euthanasia has been a matter of public debate for several decades. Although empirical research should inform policy, scale measurement is lacking. After analyzing shortcomings of previous work, we offer a systematically designed scale to measure attitudes toward euthanasia. We attempt to encompass previously unspecified dimensions of the phenomenon that are central to the euthanasia debate. The results of our pretest show that our attitude towards euthanasia (ATE) scale is both reliable and valid. We delineate active and passive euthanasia, no chance for recovery and severe pain, and patient's autonomy and doctor's authority. We argue that isolating these factors provides a more robust scale capable of better analyzing sample variance. Internal consistency is established with Cronbach's alpha = .871. Construct external consistency is established by correlating the scale with other predictors such as race and spirituality.

scholarly journals LIFE AND DEATH. EUTANASIA

2021 ◽  
pp. 63-68
Author(s):  
Mykola Polishchuk
Keyword(s):  
Hospice Care ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Passive Euthanasia ◽  
Life And Death ◽  
Sick People ◽  
Care For The Elderly ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Right ◽  
Active And Passive Euthanasia

Euthanasia is a good death in Greek. According to Wikipedia, «euthanasia» is the termination of a person's life in a quick, painless way. Euthanasia is used in people who have incurable diseases and no longer want to suffer from pain, their condition. The term «euthanasia» was first used by F. Bacon to denote easy death in the 17th century. Since 2020, certain types of euthanasia are legally allowed in Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Switzerland, Germany, Canada, parts of Australia, and in some of the sUS states. Palliative and hospice care is sometimes seen as a relative alternative to euthanasia. There are two types of euthanasia – active, which involves the administration of a dying person, drugs that cause rapid death, and passive – intentional cessation of maintenance therapy to the patient. Active euthanasia is often considered suicide with medical help, if the doctor gives the patient a drugs that will shorten his life at the request of the patient.. In Ukraine, the actions of a doctor for euthanasia are considered premeditated murder. The coronavirus pandemic has shown that many countries of the world are ready to introduce passive euthanasia, that is, in the event of mass morbidity, not only ideas are spread, but also projects about the inaccessibility of medical care for the elderly in order to save young people, about limiting the hospitalizations of elderly people with a serious illness, which requires mechanical ventilation with a shortage of ventilators and hospitals that can provide oxygenation. The debate over euthanasia revolves around the following issues: people have the right to self-determination and independent choice of destiny; helping the sick people to die may be a better choice than suffering; the difference between active and passive euthanasia is insignificant; permission for euthanasia does not necessarily lead to adverse consequences. Disputes often take place at the ethical or religious level. Opponents of euthanasia defend the right for life under any circumstances, and the adoption of the law expands the cohort of patients with euthanasia and hope for life. Keywords: euthanasia, death, life, consciousness, stroke.

The “Right to Die” (DRAFT)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert C. Macauley
Keyword(s):  
Medical Treatment ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
Pain Medication ◽  
Palliative Sedation ◽  
Patient Rights ◽  
Right To Die ◽  
Active Euthanasia ◽  
Passive Euthanasia ◽  
Life Sustaining Treatment ◽  
The Right

Formerly referred to as “passive euthanasia,” forgoing life-sustaining medical treatment came to be accepted in the 1970s based on a patient’s right to privacy. In order to achieve this societal shift, the practice was clearly distinguished from active euthanasia, which was universally rejected. Over the ensuing decades, other permutations of “the right to die”—including receiving intensive pain medication at the end of life and palliative sedation—were considered and accepted to varying degrees. Modern advocates of euthanasia now argue that it is not, in fact, so different from forgoing life-sustaining medical treatment, which endangers the critical consensus that lies at the heart of the patient rights movement. Voluntarily stopping eating and drinking is also discussed, as well as the ethical equivalence of withdrawing and withholding life-sustaining treatment.

THE RIGHT TO DIE: In Support of Passive Euthanasia

Nursing Forum ◽  
1981 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret A. Marcinek
Keyword(s):  
Right To Die ◽  
Passive Euthanasia ◽  
The Right

Caring for the Dying: From a “Negative” to a “Positive” Legal Right to Die at Home

2005 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Israel Doron
Keyword(s):  
Academic Writing ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
Necessary Condition ◽  
Right To Die ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Legal Context ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right ◽  
At Home

The choice of the old and terminally ill to die at home has been the subject of various types of research. However, one of the aspects of this subject, which has been investigated very little, is its legal context. The absence of such legal research is contrasted by the vast amount of academic writing on the legal aspects of the right to die with dignity and euthanasia. The object of this article is to analyze and break down the “right to die at home” into its different legal components. This legal analysis will be based on Professor Isaiah Berlin’s definition of two different concepts of liberty: negative and positive freedoms. The main conclusion from the legal analysis presented in this article is that it is important to understand that at the legal level the right to die at home is dependent on many different elements. These elements may be classed in two basic categories: negative and positive freedoms and rights. Even though the former is a necessary condition of the latter, without the latter the first remains purely theoretical for many old people.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document