Search results

In the present era, there is tremendous changes have taken place in beliefs and practices pertaining to the beginning of life. Family planning and birth control instead of being condemned are now accepted as a duty and responsibility. Now abortion is legal in certain circumstances, if abortion could be legal in certain circumstances, then why is there no euthanasia law for the people who have no hope of their life? All human beings have the fundamental right to live. However, there is always a dilemma involved in letting the suffering people die and killing the innocent patient under a false pretext. It can be argued that the issues involved in euthanasia have a significant implication for the individuals in society and to the policymakers. Many people pray that they will not outlive their usefulness and became a burden to their next kin, forcing them to spend large sums of money only to postpone inevitable. Euthanasia is a controversial topic and people are becomING increasingly aware of the issues attached to it. Evidence of this is the question and argument being orchestrated in a rising volume of publication seminars conferences, court decisions and legislative proposal. This work attempt to stimulate discussion and appropriate action in dealing with this present problem. This present work concentrates on the implications involved in the human rights to live especially in the field of medicine and also aims at expositing the issues of euthanasia from legal, social and ethical perspectives.

In the present era, there is tremendous changes have taken place in beliefs and practices pertaining to the beginning of life. Family planning and birth control instead of being condemned are now accepted as a duty and responsibility. Now abortion is legal in certain circumstances, if abortion could be legal in certain circumstances, then why is there no euthanasia law for the people who have no hope of their life? All human beings have the fundamental right to live. However, there is always a dilemma involved in letting the suffering people die and killing the innocent patient under a false pretext. It can be argued that the issues involved in euthanasia have a significant implication for the individuals in society and to the policymakers. Many people pray that they will not outlive their usefulness and became a burden to their next kin, forcing them to spend large sums of money only to postpone inevitable. Euthanasia is a controversial topic and people are becoming increasingly aware of the issues attached to it. Evidence of this is the question and argument being orchestrated in a rising volume of publication seminars conferences, court decisions and legislative proposal. . This work attempt to stimulate discussion and appropriate action in dealing with this present problem. This present work concentrates on the implications involved in the human rights to live especially in the field of medicine and also aims at expositing the issues of euthanasia from legal, social and ethical perspectives.

This paper focuses on socioeconomic disadvantage as a significant source of inequality in the realm of housing. Taking into account international and European human rights law, as well as selected domestic systems, it will show how anti-discrimination law has a significant role to play in addressing socioeconomic inequalities in the field of housing. Part I will explore the notion of non-discrimination on the grounds of socioeconomic status. Part II will examine two specific mechanisms to incorporate socioeconomic considerations into anti-discrimination legislation: public sector equality duties, and the inclusion of socioeconomic disadvantage as a prohibited ground of discrimination. Part III brings the discussion further into the context of housing. The paper concludes by suggesting that anti-discrimination law can be mobilised to secure the effective exercise of the right to housing by socioeconomically disadvantaged groups.

The result of two key social developments in recent years are examined here: the partial dismantling of the welfare state and the progress of genetics. Genetic insights are increasingly valuable for risk assessment, and insurers would like to use these insights to help determine premiums. Combined with the fact that social welfare is being curtailed, this could potentially create an uninsured high-risk population. Along with considerations of autonomy and privacy, this is the basis for an ethical critique of insurer's access to information. The result has often been regulation of such information; but the authors argues that due to adverse selection, regulation will not solve these problems, and this may jeopardize the survival of private personal insurance. Instead, we should look towards the resurrection of social insurance, a key component of the welfare state. This will interest academic researchers as well as professionals involved with genetics and insurance

This is the accompanying syllabus to the essay by Professor Chang, "Teaching Asian Americans and the Law: Struggling with History, Identity, and Politics." The article explores the goals and challenges in constructing a course on Asian Americans and the Law. In his course on Asian Americans and the Law, Professor Chang tries to include in the weekly reading packets history, narratives, and cases. Professor Chang includes the narratives because he has found that the students often have a difficult time relating to the history without them. After all, narratives bring life to history, making it easier for students to relate to and/or identify with the historical persons who occupy very different subject positions with regard to race, nationality, immigration history, class, and gender. He also includes cases because they simultaneously document enactments of power directed against persons of Asian ancestry and stand as examples of active resistance by those persons in the face of state and private power.