Suchergebnisse

"Physician-assisted suicide (PAS) is legal in nine US states and the District of Columbia. It is not without controversy, even in those states in which PAS laws have been passed. Proponents believe that it's a matter of liberty, that the terminally ill have the right to choose how their lives will end. Opponents argue that such laws make the terminally ill vulnerable to medical errors and abuse, and that in effect they devalue life. The viewpoints in this volume examine physician-assisted suicide from many angles, providing readers with a comprehensive approach to a challenging topic"--

This Article briefly summarizes the history of the euthanasia debate in the United States, describes the classical arguments for and against euthanasia, examines the terms of the current debate, and concludes that while society may want to recognize a competent patient's right to escape the suffering of a terminal illness, it should do so with humility—and with caution.

What would be the moral implications of the capacity for suicide in nonhuman animals? Humans can be helped to end their lives if they no longer find them bearable. Should captive animals not be given the same possibility?

The unrestrainable evolution of medical science and technology is drastically changing health-care, enabling new medical procedures and remedies, which are increasingly intertwined with moral principles. Although a uniform European approach on assisted suicide is lacking, a common trend is developing: the boundary between euthanasia, assisted suicide and end-of-life care and the frontiers of legitimate medicine are becoming increasingly blurred. In Italy, a ruling of the Constitutional Court, no. 242/2019, declared the partial unconstitutionality of article 580 of the Italian Criminal Code, which prohibited assistance in suicide. Specifically, article 580 excluded the criminal liability for the person who, in the manner provided for in Articles 1 and 2 of the law 22 December 2017, no. 219, "facilitates the execution of intention of suicide, autonomously and freely formed, of one person kept alive by life-sustaining treatments and suffering from an irreversible pathology, source of physical or psychological suffering that he/she deems intolerable, but fully capable of making free aware decisions, provided that such conditions and methods of execution have been verified by a public structure of the national health service, following the opinion of the territorially competent ethics committee." The present paper analyzes the legal regime of assisted suicide in Italy, the role of the rule of law, and the crucial boundary between the branches of government with regard to this delicate issue, and investigates current legal challenges and potential future legal tracks.

When it became possible to extend the dying process, it became necessary to decide when to stop doing so because of the enormous personal and social costs. But perspectives on "assisted suicide" vary greatly. Physicians see it as a medical issue, jurists as a legal issue, philosophers as a moral issue and the media as a political issue. These original essays show how these perspectives shape the ongoing debate

There are few issues that elicit such debate as assisted suicide. For some, assisted suicide is an important legal right for those battling fatal issues. For others, it stands for only self-harm and chaos. In this book, legal experts, journalists, activists, and ordinary civilians weigh in on this important issue, providing a wide range of viewpoints for readers. Readers are encouraged to think critically about what they have read and to form their own opinions through guided questions that follow each article.

This letter discusses the dangers of legalizing medical assisted suicide and euthanasia in South Africa, a developing country, which does not have well developed medical and justice systems and is still in the early stages of its development of democracy. It points out that the value of personal security enshrined in the country's constitution must take precedence over the value of preseving autonomy and dignity in law making.

Physician-assisted suicide (PAS) has been a widely debated topic over the last couple of decades. There are many various ways of completing PAS, there is active, passive, voluntary, involuntary, or non-voluntary. There are other end of life approaches, including hospice and palliative care in order to prevent the patient from choosing to end their life pre-maturely. This is a very controversial topic and many people disagree with whether or not people have the right to choose to die, or if physicians even have the right to provide or administer a drug that can induce death. The government and legalization also has a large impact on whether or not PAS or euthanasia is allowed. There are many biological and physiological processes to consider during the period in which patients are choosing to participate in PAS. Each and every case of a patient is unique, and PAS cannot be given a universal decision on whether it should or should not be allowed. Many studies have been done to assess the biological, psychological, bioethical, and religious views around PAS. Both bio-ethically and sociologically, there are many different points of views regarding if PAS is ethical and whether it should be allowed. A physician is said to have the role of healing people, and by allowing PAS, is it going against what their job is? Others may say that allowing PAS is helping the patient end their suffering and physicians should help a patient end their suffering.