To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Euthanasia, the right to life, right to die, human rights.
Journal articles on the topic 'Euthanasia, the right to life, right to die, human rights'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Euthanasia, the right to life, right to die, human rights.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Kadir, Yusrianto, Leni Dwi Nurmala, and Nurwita Ismail. "The Relevance of Legal Protection to Human Rights Related to Euthanasia Law in Indonesia." Jambura Law Review 3, no. 2 (July 30, 2021): 319–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.33756/jlr.v3i2.7111.
Full textAbstract:
Every human being has rights that have been given since humans are in and the right to life is an absolute right that must be lived by every human being. Law Number 39 of 1999 concerning Human Rights does not provide space for euthanasia because euthanasia is contrary to the provisions of the Human Rights Law, especially the right to life of a person. The right to life in Law Number 39 of 1999 concerning Human Rights explains that every human being or every person without exception has the right to life, the right not to be tortured, the right to personal freedom thought and conscience, the right to religion, the right not to be enslaved, the right to recognized as a person and equality before the law, and the right not to study based on applicable law is a human right that cannot be reduced under any circumstances and by anyone.
2
Nikitenko, L. O., and M. K. Babyk. "The right to euthanasia in the context of the realization of the right to life." Uzhhorod National University Herald. Series: Law, no. 65 (October 25, 2021): 65–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.24144/2307-3322.2021.65.11.
Full textAbstract:
The article examines the concept of euthanasia, the main scientific doctrines, which determine the attitude of legal experts to this phenomenon, and the reasons for the theory about the need to establish the right to euthanasia as the form of realization of the right to die in Ukrainian legislation and at the international level.Theproblemofthecontroversy of the concept that recognizes the existence of the fourth generation of human rights to which the right to euthanasia belongs is covered. It is determined that there are some disputes in scientific circles caused by theemergence of a new generation of rights. It is also determined that the new generation of rights is quite debatable, as it destroys the established classification of human rights.The concept of euthanasia is studied, the main distinguishing features between active and passive forms of the implementation of this phenomenon are characterized. It is identified that the majority of disputes about euthanasia legalizing is related to the implementation of its active form.
Based on the research of scientists’ positions from different fields of science on the possibility of legalizing euthanasia, the two main views have been identified: for legalizing euthanasia and against it.It has been found that the basis for the difference of opinion on this issue is the controversy of the right to euthanasia in the context of the constitutional human right to life.The case-law of the European Court of Human Rights in issues related to euthanasia is analyzed. The comparison of the two decisions of the Court has been made and on this basis the peculiarities of the regulation of this problem in the international arena are clarified.The positive and negative aspects of the implementation of the right to euthanasia are analyzed.The possibility of establishng the right to die at the state and international levels is considered, its contradiction to the right to life, which is enshrined in the Constitution of Ukraine, as well as in the Declaration of Human and Civil Rights, is justified. The emphasis is placed on the need to develop medicine in order to prevent cases that could lead to the use of euthanasia.Taking into consideration the number and importance of negative factors in euthanasia implementation and the general unwillingness of society to legalize such a right, the conclusion that justified the inadvisability of enshrining the right to euthanasia in the legislation of Ukraine has been developed.
3
Kyrsanova, Maryna. "The right to euthanasia in the context of the right to life guaranteed by the European Convention of human rights." Law and innovations, no. 2 (30) (June 2, 2020): 105–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.37772/2518-1718-2020-2(30)-16.
Full textAbstract:
Problem setting. Increasingly, European countries are legalizing euthanasia nationally. At the same time, this issue is a circle for scientific debate, as some experts believe that it is a natural human right that can be disposed of at its discretion. Others emphasize that no one can interrupt a person’s life, even herself. In order to summarize all positions and to determine unanimity on certain aspects of euthanasia, it is necessary to refer to the provisions of the European Convention of Human Rights, which in art. 2 proclaims the right to life and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, which has argued for the possibility of a “right to die” as part of the right to life. The purpose. Analysis of the legal position of the European Court of Human Rights regarding the possibility of applying the euthanasia procedure, exploring the prospects of introducing this procedure into the national law. Analysis of recent research and publications. The problem of euthanasia is a matter of debate in the scientific community. This topic was researched by А.В. Malko, AS Nikiforova, O.V Khomchenko, I.O Koval, O.M Mironets, O.A Miroshnichenko, Yu.S. Romashova, K. Basovskaya, Yu.M. Rybakova, O.M Shchokin, S.V Chernichenko. Article’s main body. In science will distinguish 2 types of euthanasia - active and passive. Active euthanasia involves actions aimed at ending the life of a sick person, for example, by administering a lethal injection. Passive euthanasia involves discontinuation of medical care for a patient at his will, which in the future leads to death. Considering the issue of passive euthanasia, the European Commission concluded that it could not be interpreted art. 2 of the Convention as such, which gives the right to death, but everyone has the right to dispose of his life by giving appropriate instructions in the event of an incurable disease.. The issue of the “right to die”, the right to active euthanasia has been resolved in the case of Pritty v. The United Kingdom. The European Court of Human Rights in this case was not convinced that the “right to life” guaranteed by Article 2 of the Convention could be interpreted negatively. As for Ukraine, euthanasia in our country is being prosecuted and considered a crime. In particular, according to the Fundamentals of Healthcare Legislation, medical professionals are prohibited from taking deliberate actions aimed at ending the life of a patient who is terminally ill to end his or her suffering. The Civil Code of Ukraine contains a similar warning about the prohibition to deprive a person of his life at his request. Conclusions.The European Court of Human Rights does not consider that the content of art. 2 of the Convention it is possible to derive the “right to die”. This right does not come from the right not life, is not an independent right, can not be a fundamental right, to which all the guarantees of art. 2 of the Convention. With regard to passive euthanasia, the ECtHR does not, in fact, prohibit it; it proceeds from the human right to dispose of one’s life. Speaking about the introduction of the euthanasia procedure in the national legal order, the ECtHR did not give a clear assessment on this issue. In fact, the ECtHR has taken the position that it is not entitled to assess national legislation in terms of introducing effective mechanisms to protect their citizens’ right to life.
4
Ming, David. "Euthanasia In The Side Of Theological View." Journal KERUGMA 3, no. 1 (April 15, 2020): 44–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.33856/kerugma.v3i1.156.
Full textAbstract:
Everyone can comment on life and death as the saying written by Goerge Arnold, but that does not mean that everyone can comment on living people being invited to be killed. A person's death is not a human right to determine it but God, the Creator and Protector of the whole nature, including humans who have been planned in the line of life and death. Therefore, when euthanasia arises between the medical and legal circles, then this is not something that can be forced to exist, especially as long as it is discussed without having a strong and clear basis. The author will explain what is Euthanasia? The question of Euthanasia's historical problems, the pros and cons of euthanasia, and Euthanasia's theological criticism. The author uses a descriptive method of literature and gets research results as follows: Viewed from the aspect of human rights is a moral breakdown that needs to be evaluated again whether euthanasia is in accordance with human rights values because human rights values essentially deny the existence of euthanasia. Also seen from the religious aspect, euthanasia is never justified. Law 6: "Do not kill" can not be laughed anymore means that refusing euthanasia.
5
Tonoyan, Narine. "The Right to physical and mental immunity in the light of the new constitution of the Republic of Armenia and modern challenges in this field in Armenia." Bratislava Law Review 3, no. 2 (December 31, 2019): 84–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.46282/blr.2019.3.2.150.
Full textAbstract:
The Constitution of the Republic of Armenia (RA) for the first time envisaged the right to physical and mental immunity (in the former edition of personal immunity) in 2015. According to Article 25(1) of the RA Constitution, everyone shall have the right to physical and mental integrity. That right may be restricted only by law, for the purpose of state security, preventing or disclosing crimes, protecting public order, health and morals or the basic rights and freedoms of others. The bodily rights of the person, including the right to physical and mental immunity, are recognized in professional literature as somatic rights that have become a subject of vigorous debates as a new generation of human rights. In general, human somatic (bodily) rights constitute a wholeness, which includes: the right to life; the right to die or the right to choose a way of giving up one’s life (right to suicide, right to use euthanasia), etc. Current report in the light of the RA Constitution report discuss some of important issues in this field: eugenic experiments, medical intervention, organs and tissues transplantation, etc.
6
A. Siregar, Rospita. "Eutanasia dan Hak Asasi Manusia." to-ra 1, no. 3 (January 5, 2016): 193. http://dx.doi.org/10.33541/tora.v1i3.1145.
Full textAbstract:
A patient who is suffering from terminal illness and an incurable condition has the possibility to propose to end his/ her life by lethal injection or suspending the medical treatment. This practice is known as euthanasia. Euthanasia is forbidden because it is categorized as homicide and consequently the perpetrator is punishable by criminal law. This reviewdiscusses (1) How is euthanasia legislation in Indonesian positive laws (2) How is euthanasia viewed from human rights perspective (3) How euthanasia is eligislated and conducted in some European countries. To analyze the afore mentioned problems, the writer conducts research by legal normative approach which is implemented in the thorough study of written regulation, official documents and related literatures. The writer finds tha Euthanasia is regarded as criminal act in Indonesia because it is a form of crime against life which stipulated in the Article 344 of the Indonesian Criminal Code (Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana/ KUHP):”Anyone who takes life of others which is clearly done with an intention is punishable by imprisonment for maximum twelve years”. The Declaration of Human Rights has stipulated the “right to life” which is fundamental and inherent in the nature of human being, universally acknowledge and an eternal endowment from The God. However, there are no any stipulations on-- the right to die and therefore euthanasia is a violation of human rights and against the principle of believing in one God. But, the right to die is already stipulated in some laws of developed countries, such as some countries in Europe
7
Eijk, Willem J. "The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in medical-ethical perspective." Medicina e Morale 48, no. 1 (February 28, 1999): 49–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.4081/mem.1999.809.
Full textAbstract:
Notwithstanding its impressive achievements in combating crimes against humanity, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights offers no sufficient basis for medical ethics. It does not provide a clear definition of the human being who is subject of human rights, thus giving room for philosophical anthropologies according to which fetuses or neonates are no human persons yet or at most ‘marginal persons’. Because the Declaration likewise fails to define the concept of right, it can be interpreted from the perspective of classical theories of right as well as from that of the ‘choice theory of right’. If, as the last states, the right to life would include the right to dispose of it, the Declaration could serve to defend euthanasia, assisted suicide and manipulative medical and surgical interventions as well.
8
Shala, Irena, and Kilda Gusha. "The Debate Over Euthanasia and Human Rights." European Scientific Journal, ESJ 12, no. 8 (March 30, 2016): 73. http://dx.doi.org/10.19044/esj.2016.v12n8p73.
Full textAbstract:
The present article analyzes the debate on issue of euthanasia (voluntary assisted suicide) and the relevance of international human rights norms to that debate. Euthanasia is one of the most complex issues facing human rights, especially given its ethical, legal, medical and religious dimensions. These include: modern medical technology and the availability of medical measures to prolong life; In historical terms inherit challenging laws by refusing euthanasia; The phenomenon of growing older population and the large the number of people affected by AIDS; And fall the impact of religious organizations that consider life to be sacred: terminating a life, for whatever reason, not only infringes religious beliefs but may transgress divine activities beyond the reach of human beings. Justice system is an essential player in the debate. Although euthanasia is generally unlawful, there is an increasing movement towards legalization, particularly in western jurisdictions. Serious political and legal actions taken by euthanasia advocates and their lawyers have brought assisted suicide to the brink of legal assistance. In fact, legislation allowing voluntary euthanasia has been passed in a small number of jurisdictions, and domestic courts in other countries are being repeatedly asked to consider whether the interests at stake with regard to the right to die should be recognized. Die due to euthanasia in Albania is a criminal offense which is considered a violation of the right to live and punished according to the Criminal Code. But in the Code of Ethics and Deontology of the Order of Physicians, there is a provision, which allows the application of a form of interference, which can be interpreted in as passive euthanasia. And this decision remains entirely to the discretion of the physician.
9
PETIKAM, Sailaja. "EUTHANASIA IN INDIA – LEGISLATIVE PERSPECTIVE." Revista de Drept Constituțional, no. 1 (2021): 43–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.47743/rdc-2021-1-0004.
Full textAbstract:
Every human being should enjoy right to life. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution as well as under article 3 of International Convention Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948, guaranteed the right to life. Every aspect of right to life has been always subject to consideration of judiciary and depend upon the facts and situations. Right to die is also claimed under this head. Euthanasia is interpreted as 'mercy killing' or 'good death'. It is advocated that there are different situations in which it should be allowed to the person to let him choose his death in place of compelling him living alive. There are different approaches in this regard which either opposes the grant of mercy killing or denies to grant the death as right to die due to some causes. Everyone has the right to live dignified life according to his wish being living into certain limits and it is expected that a human being should struggle also in adverse circumstances around him. He should not lean in front of the situations. The Indian culture gives us such teachings. Hindu religion believes in the eternity of soul. Death is only the way to change a body. The soul never dies, it is eternal. Muslim religion also believes that life should be finished only upon the wish of Allah, it condemns the unnatural ending of life. But in present society in some situations, it is defended that the person should have the right to choose death. Thus, in this context the paper concentrated on the law of euthanasia in India in a legislative perspective and judicial interpretations on euthanasia.
10
Lutsenko, A. P., and D. I. Khairullina. "Prospects of decriminalization and legalization of euthanasia in Ukraine." Uzhhorod National University Herald. Series: Law, no. 64 (August 14, 2021): 55–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.24144/2307-3322.2021.64.10.
Full textAbstract:
This article is devoted to the study of the legal regulation of the institution of euthanasia in foreign practice and in Ukrainian law. We conducted a thorough analysis of the existing arguments for and against the legalization of the assisted suicide procedure, which have developed in scientific doctrine. Given the importance of the right to life in the fundamental human rights system, deprivation of any life is unacceptable, as it could set a precedent that would lead to the abuse of criminal intent by the possibility of masking premeditated murder with voluntary consent to accelerate biological death. That is why today in Ukraine deprivation of life at the request of a person is a crime, namely premeditated murder, and therefore euthanasia at the state level is now criminalized. However, after analyzing the views of scholars studying the dynamics of human rights, as well as paying attention to the practice of countries that have already legalized euthanasia at the state level, we concluded that assisted suicide today is a powerful mechanism that can guarantee the human right to a dignified existence at the end of her life. A number of foreign countries have shown by their example that the legalization of euthanasia is an important step towards building a more humane and humane society, where there is a place of mercy for terminally ill people who want to end their lives painlessly.
The current position of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine on the interpretation of the right to life does not allow for its expanded understanding, and therefore there is a need to amend the Constitution (for example recognition of the right to die) or change the position of the Court. In order for the right to dispose of one's own life to be properly guaranteed in Ukraine as well, we have developed on the basis of our research and proposed an algorithm of actions that can be used in the implementation of the institute of assisted suicide in Ukraine. We emphasize the need to amend the Constitution of Ukraine or change the position of the Constitutional Court on the interpretation of the right to life and the development of an appropriate legal framework that should take into account the medical side of this issue.
11
Knoetze, Adriaan, and Shaun De Freitas. "The Protection of Conscientious Objection against Euthanasia in Health Care." Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal 22 (September 20, 2019): 1–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2019/v22i0a5590.
Full textAbstract:
In 2015 the South African judiciary was confronted with the issue of the so-called "right to die", when Robin Stransham-Ford applied to the High Court of South Africa (the North Gauteng Division) for an order to have his life terminated. Although the Supreme Court of Appeal set aside the order (on procedural grounds), the High Court's judgment paved the way towards renewed attention regarding the possible legalisation of euthanasia. A pertinent question arising from this is whether a medical practitioner may be compelled to participate in the administering of euthanasia. Bearing this in mind, this article argues for the protection of the rights of medical practitioners who conscientiously object to participating in the administering of euthanasia, especially where such an objection is based on religious beliefs. From this arises the necessity to investigate the rights applicable both to the medical practitioner and the patient (which focusses on the right to freedom of religion and personal autonomy), the weighing up against one another of the different meanings ascribed to such rights, as well as the postulation of a substantively competitive rationale against the background of the importance and sacredness of human life. This also overlaps with the importance of the endeavour towards higher levels of religious freedoms and consequently of plurality in democratic societies. Applying the proportionality test in the analysis whether a medical practitioner's rights may be reasonably and justifiably limited against the background of administering euthanasia also strengthens the argument for the protection of the medical practitioner's right to object conscientiously to the administering of euthanasia. This, together with the vacuum there is in substantive human rights jurisprudence related to this topic, suggests the importance of this article both for the South African context and beyond.
12
Shafi, O. O., and K. V. Lyashenko. "Analysis of the legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights on the application of the euthanasia procedure." Uzhhorod National University Herald. Series: Law, no. 63 (August 9, 2021): 107–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.24144/2307-3322.2021.63.19.
Full textAbstract:
The article examines the problems of euthanasia and the realization of the human right to suicide with the help of others in the context of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Rights, the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. The authors focused on finding the necessary compromise between protecting the patient's right to life, which is a positive commitment of the state, and protecting the patient's right to respect for private life and individual independence. The main positions of the European Court of Human Rights on the possibility of use in euthanasia and in which cases are analyzed step by step.
In each case, it was described under what conditions the applicants had applied to the Court and what the difference was between the cases. It is emphasized what the Court relied on in resolving each individual case. It is stated how the Court interprets the possibility of applying Article 2 of the Convention in a negative light and in what cases and under what conditions the Court considers it necessary to apply the principle of “ratione personae”. It is indicated what is the main difference between active and passive euthanasia, and in which countries any of the forms of termination of life of a sick person is allowed, regulated and clearly regulated. It is noted that the issue of application or discontinuation of treatment was considered taking into account many objective factors that are taken into account in each case. Also, attention is paid to the analysis of the court's position on the importance of the role of the state in matters of termination of life, where countries should be given discretion in deciding on disconnection from artificial life support. Separately, the main risks of legitimizing euthanasia are emphasized, in particular, the authors point to the need to improve and comply with the imperative norms in each country to ensure the fulfillment of the positive responsibilities of each state.
13
Chekhovska, Iryna V., Olha M. Balynska, Roman I. Blahuta, Valeriy V. Sereda, and Serhii O. Mosondz. "EUTHANASIA OR PALLIATIVE CARE: LEGAL PRINCIPLES OF THE IMPLEMENTATION IN THE CONTEXT OF THE REALIZATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS TO LIFE." Wiadomości Lekarskie 72, no. 4 (2019): 677–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.36740/wlek201904133.
Full textAbstract:
Introduction: The right to life – is natural inherent human right, the fundamental principle of the existence of mankind, recognized by all civilized countries. It is enshrined in numerous international and national legal acts as the most important benefit of a man. However, there are discussions about the use of euthanasia. Therefore, the problem of the legalization of euthanasia requires careful study. The aim: The purpose of this article is to analyze and systematize existing problems of the legalization of euthanasia. The main objective of the article is to study the legal grounds for the introduction of euthanasia in the context of realizing the right to life, to study the content of palliative care, to distinguish the barriers to its development, and to formulate propositions for their elimination. Materials and methods: Theoretical (analysis, synthesis, generalization, systematization, etc.) and empirical methods (observation, survey, classification, etc.) were used in the course of the research. Results: The author has revealed the negative attitude of medical staff to the possibility of using different forms of euthanasia during the study. The reasons for the positive attitude of patients, who were in the thermal stage to the euthanasia, have been determined. It has been established that the correction of most causes leads to a significant reduction in the percentage of positive attitude to euthanasia. The arguments of opponents and supporters of the legalization of euthanasia procedure have been analyzed. On this basis the author has proved the objective absence of legal grounds for the legalization of euthanasia procedure and direct violation of human rights to life. Conclusions: The author has proved the expediency of the development of palliative care as an alternative to euthanasia, has outlined the obstacles to its development, has offered to develop regulatory base for the legal regulation of the provision of palliative care, to establish the National Coordination Council on palliative and hospice care, to form the system of state control over the quality of provision of palliative care and observance of the rights of patients.
14
Koperek, Jerzy, Adam Koperek, and Abraham Kome. "TODAY’S THREATS OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE CONTEXT OF PROTECTION OF THE RIGHT TO LIFE." Scientific Journal of Polonia University 29, no. 4 (June 18, 2018): 128–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.23856/2915.
Full textAbstract:
In the modern world protecting the right to life encounters various obstacles. Personalistic ethics encouraging attitudes pro vita is also taking the dialogue with contemporary philosophical and political currents, including those that do not accept the integral concept of man, but rather they are in favor of his reductionist vision, which in turn it lead to reduced ability to protect human rights, despite their proclamation as the rights of individuals.
Appearing in this position „anthropological error”, it also leads to a reductionist vision of social structures such as family, society, nation or state. Moreover, such a vision of man and the world around him, it also determines the constitutional dimension of the state. Consequently, this leads to the creation and operation of various forms of democracy that instead create conditions for legal protection of the right to life from conception to natural death, legalize abortion and euthanasia. This is a serious contemporary threat to the right to life.
15
Orzeszyna, Krzysztof. "Prawo do naturalnego i godnego umierania." Studia Iuridica Lublinensia 29, no. 4 (September 30, 2020): 221. http://dx.doi.org/10.17951/sil.2020.29.4.221-232.
Full textAbstract:
<p>The article addresses the issue of the right to natural and dignified dying in the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. The right to life enshrined in Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights is currently balanced in judicial practice with the right to privacy. The right to effectively demand inflicting death is usually located in the sphere of autonomous human decisions. However, not only is the construction of such a right contrary to the principle of dignity of every person, but it would erode the guarantees vested in any terminally-ill person. The analysis of Strasbourg’s case-law setting a common standard for the ECHR Member States does not make it possible to assume the existence of the right to death as a subjective right of an individual. In the area of the protection of human life, States are obliged to take positive action. That relatively established case-law was clearly modified in the case <em>Lambert and others v. France</em>, as the Court crossed the red line in favour of passive euthanasia, accepting the vague French procedural rules recognizing artificial nutrition and hydration of the patient as a form of therapy that may be discontinued.</p>
16
BUIJSEN, MARTIN. "A Life Fulfilled: Should There Be Assisted Suicide for Those Who Are Done with Living?" Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 27, no. 3 (May 30, 2018): 366–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0963180117000755.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract:The issue of assisted suicide for those with a “fulfilled life” is being hotly debated in the Netherlands. A large number of Dutch people feel that elderly people (i.e., people who have reached the age of 70) with a “fulfilled life” should have access to assisted suicide. Citizens have therefore requested Parliament to expand the existing legislation that governs euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. The Dutch constitution does not permit national legislation to be incompatible with higher international (human rights) law. An analysis of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights shows that a person’s right to decide on the time and manner of his or her death should be regarded as an aspect of the right to privacy. Although no positive obligation has been imposed on parties to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms to facilitate suicide, they may do so, provided that certain conditions are met.
17
Behuniak, Susan M. "Death with “dignity”: The wedge that divides the disability rights movement from the right to die movement." Politics and the Life Sciences 30, no. 01 (2011): 17–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0730938400017652.
Full textAbstract:
Much of the American debate over physician assisted death (PAD) is framed as an ideological split between conservatives and liberals, pro life and pro choice advocates, and those who emphasize morality versus personal autonomy. Less examined, but no less relevant, is a split within the ranks of progressives—one that divides those supporting a right to die in the name of human rights from disability rights activists who invoke human rights to vehemently oppose euthanasia. This paper reviews how “dignity” serves both as a divisive wedge in this debate but also as a value that can span the divide between groups and open the way to productive discourse. Supporters of legalized euthanasia use “dignity” to express their position that some deaths might indeed be accelerated. At the same time, opponents adopt the concept to argue that physician assisted suicide stigmatizes life with a disability. To bridge this divide, the worldviews of two groups, Compassion & Choices and Not Dead Yet, are studied. The analysis concludes that the two organizations are more parallel than contrary—a finding that offers opportunities for dialogue and perhaps even advances in public policy.
18
Behuniak, Susan M. "Death with “dignity”: The wedge that divides the disability rights movement from the right to die movement." Politics and the Life Sciences 30, no. 1 (2011): 17–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.2990/30_1_17.
Full textAbstract:
Much of the American debate over physician assisted death (PAD) is framed as an ideological split between conservatives and liberals, pro life and pro choice advocates, and those who emphasize morality versus personal autonomy. Less examined, but no less relevant, is a split within the ranks of progressives—one that divides those supporting a right to die in the name of human rights from disability rights activists who invoke human rights to vehemently oppose euthanasia. This paper reviews how “dignity” serves both as a divisive wedge in this debate but also as a value that can span the divide between groups and open the way to productive discourse. Supporters of legalized euthanasia use “dignity” to express their position that some deaths might indeed be accelerated. At the same time, opponents adopt the concept to argue that physician assisted suicide stigmatizes life with a disability. To bridge this divide, the worldviews of two groups, Compassion & Choices and Not Dead Yet, are studied. The analysis concludes that the two organizations are more parallel than contrary—a finding that offers opportunities for dialogue and perhaps even advances in public policy.
19
Lucan, Maria Casandra. "The right to death. Fiction or reality?" Journal of Legal Studies 17, no. 31 (June 1, 2016): 37–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/jles-2016-0004.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The present article is part of a dense literature – result of a perennial debate – that has polarized societies for a long time and has evident reverberations in the present. It deals with “the right to death”, trying to offer some answers referring to its existence in fact and the way in which it is perceived by different states and diverse entities with juridical nature. In the first part of the paper, it is insisted upon the right to life, so that subsequently, to speak in detail about a “right to death” and the moral and juridical implications of using such phrases. There are analyzed different states of the world found on one part or the other of the barricade in what concerns the legality of euthanasia and assisted suicide – considered the two hypostasis of the right in question. It is offered, as well, an analysis of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, mentioning that, paradoxically, while it cannot be modified so that it allows the appearance of some new rights, it can tacitly accept the creation by some states that have adhered to it of some rights antagonistic with those presented in its text. The conclusion, is that not any liberalization movement of a social action – quantified through the request of a right – has as a direct result a progress of the respective society, especially when the action creates something diametrically opposed to some fundamental functioning norms, such as, by excellence, the granting of the protection of life of all individuals.
20
Akhtyrska, Nataliia M., and Yuriy V. Grodetskiy. "THE RIGHT TO LIFE FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF PERSONAL AUTONOMY IN DECISION-MAKING ON EUTHANASIA (REVIEW OF THE ECHR PRACTICE AND THE LEGISLATION OF SELECTED COUNTRIES)." Wiadomości Lekarskie 74, no. 11 (2021): 3108–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.36740/wlek202111242.
Full textAbstract:
The aim: To analyze law enforcement practice on the basis of the national legislation of foreign states to single out features of legal regulation of the right to euthanasia realization and to outline the Ukrainian prospects of euthanasia legalization. Materials and methods: The empirical basis of the research is the legislation of some European countries (Belgium, Spain, Italy, Portugal, and the Netherlands) and Canada; decisions of the European Court of Human Rights on the right to voluntary death and the obligations of states; the results of a survey of 750 respondents conducted by the authors. The methodological basis of the study were philosophical views on life, death, and the right to certainty, formal-logical method (analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, etc.), comparative, analytical, statistical, sociological methods of cognition, as well as a synergetic approach. Conclusions: The issue of legal regulation of euthanasia is multifactorial, socially conditioned, and requires a positive action of the state both in terms of regulation and/or prohibition, and the proper provision of citizens with health care. Legislative support for the human right to a “dignified death” is dictated, to some extent, by society’s demand, which must be finally resulted in the draft law. As for Ukraine, the adoption of such a law is obviously premature. Although according to a survey of citizens on euthanasia and the feasibility of introducing such a law in Ukraine, 57% are positive about the experience of other countries, and 41% were in favor of adopting a law in Ukraine, it is not possible to assess their opinion due to ignorance of legislation where euthanasia is allowed.
21
Cavanagh, Denis. "Right to Life in the American Medical System." Medicina e Morale 45, no. 6 (December 31, 1996): 1151–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.4081/mem.1996.895.
Full textAbstract:
The article deals with the impact of the so called “culture of death” on medical practice in United States (US). In fact, in America, while the pretence is being kept up on the importance of the Hippocratic oath and the evangelic benevolence of the Good Samaritan, the strategy of the secular humanists is to try to make these irrelevant in the twin interests of social convenience and fiscal security. This campaign has been quietly waged in the media, in the courts, in public schools and universities. According this strategy, the threats to human life are, namely, two: abortion and euthanasia.
On the first issue, in US the situation is discouraging because the US Supreme Court rulings Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton in 1973, that have made abortion a woman’s choice for any reason in the first and second trimester and available with medical consultation for almost any reason in the third trimester of pregnancy.
Regarding the euthanasia, the campaign strategy is following the same pattern as that used to legalize abortion: the Euthanasia Lobby is claiming that millions of people in America are suffering unbearable pain because of terminal illness and so ought to have the right to end their pain with physician- assisted suicide.
On the contrary, the author assert that there is no right to destroy any human life or participate in its destruction and there is no good moral reason for abortion or euthanasia, including the physician-assisted suicide. Finally, the author think that it is vital that Catholic activists, allied with Christian church-going brethren, should resist with all the power they can muster to the “culture of death”.
22
Ostrovska, B. V. "SHOULD EUTHANASIA BE A SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM OF "DECENT" DEATH? (ON THE EXAMPLE OF THE CASE LAMBERT AND OTHERS V. FRANCE)." Actual Problems of International Relations, no. 141 (2019): 57–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.17721/apmv.2019.141.1.57-67.
Full textAbstract:
The legal and bioethical problem of legalizing involuntary passive euthanasia as a practice of ending a person’s life, which in particular is in a minimal conscious state and with disabilities, on the example of the case Lambert and Others v. France of the European Court of Human Rights, is explored in this article. Due to the differences between the national legislation of the states on the regulation of euthanasia and given the lack of the international consensus on this issue, as well as the unified position of the judges on the legality of its application in the context of protecting the right to life on the basis of Art. 2 and 3 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950, the need to ensure adequate medical care and treatment guaranteed by the state in order to maintain/prolong a person’s life (first of all, artificial hydration and nutrition, mechanical ventilation, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, blood transfusions, dialysis, etc.), and subsequent rehabilitation, as well as palliative care as an alternative to euthanasia, is emphasized. Mandatory compliance with the principle of prohibition of discrimination against person based on health status is stressed. The consequences of using involuntary passive euthanasia, including the need to bring to legal liability, are analyzed.
23
Buletsa, S. B. "The Correlation Between the Right to Death and the Right to Dignified Death." Medicne pravo, no. 27(1) (February 22, 2021): 9–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.25040/medicallaw2021.01.009.
Full textAbstract:
In order to examine the object of research, and both to achieve the goal of research and to ensure the completeness, objectivity, reliability and persuasiveness of the results, the author used a set of general and special methods that are peculiar to legal science. In particular, the origin and long historical path of development of certain human rights were studied with the help of the historical method. On the basis of system-structural method there has been formulated the general structure of the study; with the help of dialectical method the author has analyzed the provisions of law and case law on the pecularities of the right to die. The analysis of the legislation of foreign countries has been provided using comparative legal method, which have made it possible to recall their positive experience in terms of analysis of the right to death.
This article reveals the scientific approaches of researchers to determine the nature of death, the right to die, the right to a dignified death, to identify features thereof and to provide distinction between them. The paper analyzes ways to protect the right to die. Part of the work is devoted to the analysis of the law enforcement practice of the European Court of Human Rights on the possibility and expediency of the existence of certain criteria for restricting the right to life.
Based on the study, it has been concluded that death and the right to die, the right to die and the right to a dignified death are correlated as primary and secondary, i.e., the right to die includes all these concepts. They cannot exist without each other. In different countries they are interpreted differently, but the main feature thereof is the free will of a person, who has an incurable disease, to die. It has been argued that the term right to a dignified death is the most appropriate to use. It has been noted that a significant number of foreign countries provide for the right to die and euthanasia.
24
Livings, Ben. "A Right to Assist? Assisted Dying and the Interim Policy." Journal of Criminal Law 74, no. 1 (February 2010): 31–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1350/jcla.2010.74.1.615.
Full textAbstract:
There are few more controversial, or emotive, debates within the criminal law than that which surrounds the topic of euthanasia, questioning as it does the fundamental role of the law in regulating the most intimate aspects of a person's life and death. The acknowledgement by the courts (notably in the cases of Diane Pretty and Debbie Purdy) that this area engages a person's rights under the European Convention on Human Rights exacerbates the urgency of the problem, and further nuances the debate as to the extent to which the autonomy of the person is impinged upon, and whether this is a function legitimately exercised by the state. In the wake of the announcement of new guidelines for prosecution in cases of assisted suicide, this article examines the state of the law regarding assisted suicide in England and Wales, and the fragile position of euthanasia within the criminal law. It will look to the various, and often rights-based, challenges to the law, and in particular a potential challenge through Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
25
Minocha, Vivek R., and Arima Mishra. "Euthanasia: Ethical Challenges of Shift from “Right to Die” to “Objective Decision”." Annals of the National Academy of Medical Sciences (India) 55, no. 02 (April 2019): 110–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0039-1698362.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractEuthanasia is mercy killing to alleviate the pain and misery of moribund persons. The thought in this regard is “Right to Life” includes “Right to Die.” This paper examines the issue of euthanasia in advanced stage of terminal cases with no possibility of reversal and it has been argued that there is a case for lifting euthanasia from the domain of human rights “Right to Die,” bringing the issue as a matter for professional opinion, a kind of medical advice/prescription. Guidelines need to be framed and criteria are laid down and notified under which euthanasia can be recommended. The decision is taken whether or not the criteria laid down are fulfilled in an objective manner. Like for other medical interventions “informed consent” is essential. In consideration of safeguards the decision is entrusted to a medical board and is subject to a legal prescrutiny. Professionally prescribed decision will to a great extent reduce emotive response surrounding euthanasia. The family may not have to face a difficult dilemma in deciding about euthanasia. There may not be a necessity of “living will,” although it may still be useful. The change to treat euthanasia as a professional decision/medical advice will require making legal and administrative provisions to empower medical establishment to discharge responsibility of euthanasia. It is essential to legalize euthanasia with corresponding modifications of medical ethics and code of conduct prescribed by Medical Council of India, State Medical Councils, and other regulatory bodies. It is essential to identify the procedure for carrying out euthanasia and the personnel assigned to actually carry out. Injection of lethal substance in lethal dose may be a favored choice. Once final decision after legal prescrutiny is arrived for euthanasia, differentiating passive and active euthanasia is unnecessary. In one perspective, active euthanasia is less disturbing for the patient, family, and friends as withdrawal of supporting tubes leading to dehydration, wasting, and struggling for breath associated with passive euthanasia, which nullifies the basic tenet of euthanasia, can be avoided. There is a possibility of spill over benefit of “active euthanasia” in the form of opportunity to promote cadaveric organ transplantation. Caution has to be exercised for effective safeguards to prevent misuse. There is a case for consideration for brining decision-making process regarding euthanasia within medical professional assessment and implementation.
26
Verulava, Tengiz, Mariam Mamulashvili, Iago Kachkachishvili, and Revaz Jorbenadze. "The Attitude of the Orthodox Parishioners Toward Euthanasia: Evidence From Georgia." International Quarterly of Community Health Education 39, no. 2 (December 27, 2018): 101–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0272684x18819963.
Full textAbstract:
Background The right of euthanasia is the subject of worldwide discussion today, as it is one of the most controversial medical, religious, political, or ethical issues. This study aims to survey the attitudes of Orthodox parishioners toward the euthanasia. Methods: Within the quantitative study, the survey was conducted through a semistructured questionnaire. Respondents were the parishioners of the Orthodox Church. Within the qualitative study, the survey of the experts of the Orthodox Church, in particular the clergy, was conducted. During the survey of the experts, we used the snowball method. Results The majority of respondents (81%) were aware of euthanasia. The dominant opinion is that euthanasia is “ the consent to life termination during the illness, when there is no way out and recovery is impossible” or “ a terminally ill person voluntarily decides to end life painlessly.” Those who disagree with euthanasia rely on the religious factors (why the church prohibits it). Those who agree with euthanasia action argue the legitimate human rights and free will of person. Most of the respondents (86%) have not heard about euthanasia practices in Georgia. Most of the respondents (71%) knew that the Orthodox Church prohibits euthanasia; 39% of the respondents believe that euthanasia is justified in medical terms. Conclusion It is advisable to raise public awareness on euthanasia in religious, medical, cultural, social, and legal aspects.
27
Rabia, Sumera. "http://habibiaislamicus.com/index.php/hirj/article/view/193." Habibia islamicus 5, no. 3 (September 30, 2021): 189–214. http://dx.doi.org/10.47720/hi.2021.0503u13.
Full textAbstract:
Euthanasia is bioethical dilemma. Different countries are struggling for its legalization. The Proponents consider that Euthanasia is against the dignity of human being and everyone has right to relief his pain. They think that human beings have to live a life which is according to the standard of humanity but when a person suffers from a disease which is incurable, his standard of life goes down to a level which is not suitable for a human being. So in such condition they should have the right to end their lives with dignity. This paper basically deals with what is the concept of euthanasia? What is its history and what rationale does its proponents and opponents presents? This research is historical, analytical and descriptive. The views of both parties have been analyzed. The research shows that it is not a new phenomenon. Its roots are found in Greek period. Its proponents take it as a savior of human dignity and freedom. It’s the basic right of every human to decide about the end of his life. On the other side the opponents think that it is unethical and we don’t have a right to end our life as we are a part of big plan of God.
28
Kullolli, Brunela, and lrjan Hysa. "Law and Society - Euthanasia and Criminal Law." European Journal of Social Science Education and Research 5, no. 2 (August 1, 2018): 142–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/ejser-2018-0042.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Euthanasia or "sweet death" is a topic that has sparked numerous debates throughout history. In Albania, the right to life is protected by Article 21 of the Constitution of the Republic of Albania. Regarding the individual's right to die in Albania, both forms of euthanasia, the passive and the active one, are considered criminal offenses and are punishable by law. The problem lies in the fact that such a definition is not found in the Albanian legislation, but such actions are considered as criminal by the interpretation of the law. In this topic we will study the perception of Albanians regarding euthanasia and whether the Albanian legislation should include this form of soft death or not. The protection of life in the country should take the dimensions of a sustainable protection. For this reason, in addition to the positive effects of improving life protection that derive from the application of the entirety of the various criminal justice programs and policies, also including the recent amendments to the Criminal Code of the Republic of Albania, a concrete and continuous protection should be provided in support of the right to life. I have always drawn a debate on this issue, which deals with the fundamental human right, with the most sacred right, that of life.
29
Bieńkowska, Daria. "End of life decision making in healthcare in the prism of Council of Europe’s Human Rights Standards." Gubernaculum et Administratio 2(24) (2021): 137–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.16926/gea.2021.02.24.
Full textAbstract:
The issue of decisions made at the end of life relating to the so-called “Right to death”, “death in dignity”, which in the literature on the subject is referred to as end-of-life decision making in the legal and medical space, arouses the interest of lawyers and doctors, and due to the specific gravity of the topic, it is also the subject of public debate. This article presents the issue of end-of-life decision making in health care in the light of the standards of the Council of Europe. The main purpose of the problem outlined in this way will be to analyze the legal admissibility of decisions concerning the end of life at the request of the interested person in the legal and human perspective. The summary indicates that despite the lack of a consensus in contemporary Europe as to the understanding of human rights, and hence the admissibility of active euthanasia and assisted suicide, the situation may change with the increasing emphasis on individual autonomy in medical law.
30
Manninen, Bertha Alvarez. "A Pro-Choice Response to New York’s Reproductive Health Act." Philosophies 6, no. 1 (February 16, 2021): 15. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/philosophies6010015.
Full textAbstract:
On 22 January 2019, New York state passed the Reproductive Health Act (RHA), which specifies three circumstances under which a healthcare provider may perform an abortion in New York: (1) the patient is within twenty-four weeks of pregnancy, (2) the fetus is non-viable, or (3) the abortion is necessary to protect the patient’s life or health. The first one, that of abortion being accessible within the first twenty-four weeks of pregnancy, is not unique to New York, as many other states allow medical professionals to provide abortions during this time. The latter two have caused significant controversy because they detail certain circumstances in which abortions would be accessible after twenty-four weeks. This paper will focus on these latter two circumstances. I will first argue that any debate or discussion about (2) must go beyond the conventional debate about the ethics of abortion and incorporate, more appropriately, a discussion on euthanasia and the ethics of end-of-life care for nascent human life. In particular, it requires us to consider the morality of non-voluntary active euthanasia for non-viable fetuses, rather than just a discussion of the ethics of late term abortions. When it comes to (3), I will argue that assessing its moral permissibility actually raises some legitimate moral concerns, even from a reproductive rights perspective. On certain readings, it seems as if condition (3) would allow for the termination of a healthy fetus for reasons not related to the mother’s physical health or life. If this is the case, I argue, the right to an abortion would be construed as a right to fetal termination, rather than just fetal evacuation. However, I will argue that there are good reasons that pro-choice advocates should interpret the right to an abortion as a right to fetal evacuation instead of termination, and if this is the case, a woman should not be able to demand the death of a healthy fetus if ending the pregnancy safely via fetal evacuation would suffice.
31
Pavlenko, Tetіana A., Tetіana Ye Dunaieva, and Marina Yu Valuiska. "PROSPECTS OF EUTHANASIA LEGAL REGULATION IN UKRAINE." Wiadomości Lekarskie 73, no. 10 (2020): 2289–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.36740/wlek202010135.
Full textAbstract:
The aim of this article is to explore the ways of euthanasia regulation and to propose the most effective one. Materials and methods: The authors of the article used the methods of analysis and synthesis, a comparative legal method. The scientific literature is evaluated and analyzed along with the experience of European countries, data of Ukrainian and international organizations and the results of scientific researches. Conclusions: the understanding of euthanasia should be reviewed in terms of the possibility in exceptional cases of its executing for terminally ill person. This is an inherent human right. However, it is established that the right to dispose of his life belongs exclusively to the bearer of this right and it cannot be delegated.
32
Emina, Kemi Anthony. "LEGAL, SOCIAL AND ETHICAL ISSUES IN EUTHANASIA." Jurnal Sosialisasi: Jurnal Hasil Pemikiran, Penelitian dan Pengembangan Keilmuan Sosiologi Pendidikan, no. 3 (March 30, 2021): 53. http://dx.doi.org/10.26858/sosialisasi.v0i3.19963.
Full textAbstract:
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.
33
Abakare, Chris O. "LEGAL, SOCIAL AND ETHICAL ISSUES IN EUTHANASIA." PREDESTINATION: Journal of Society and Culture 1, no. 2 (March 5, 2021): 229. http://dx.doi.org/10.26858/prd.v1i2.19535.
Full textAbstract:
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.
34
Kruessmann, Thomas. "Criminal Law and Human Rights - Some Examples from the Emergence of European Criminal Law." Russian Journal of Criminology 14, no. 5 (November 20, 2020): 745–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.17150/2500-4255.2020.14(5).745-757.
Full textAbstract:
Criminal law is often described as the field of law that expresses the strongest national characteristics of a given jurisdiction and is the least amenable to change. Naturally, social rules providing some kind of penalty when violated have existed throughout the history of mankind. In Europe, the current understanding of criminal law has been shaped by Enlightenment thought, the ideas of human rights, liberalism and finally the national movements which led, inter alia, to the famous codifications of criminal law of the 19th century. In Russia, criminal law has certainly (not been isolated from the developments that took place in 19th century Europe. For example, the abolition of corporal punishment is but one good marker of humanisation. But compared to Europe, codified criminal law in Russia has been much less understood as the magna charta of the offender (Franz von Liszt), eventually leading to the study of human rights in criminal law. Rather, it has been viewed as the expression of the Tsars unfettered power to mete out punishment, - a line of thinking which indicates the continuing difficulty in Russian criminal law doctrine to accept limitations on the power of the legislator to criminalize. This paper will not deal with Russian doctrinal approaches to criminal law in a direct way. Instead, its purpose is to demonstrate the European Unions (EUs) current thinking on the effects that human rights have on the development of criminal law. As of today, criminal law is under a variety of influences among which the changing understanding of human rights is a very important one. In the Western world, there is a large amount of literature dealing with human rights and criminal law in general1 [1; 2], and it is hardly possible to come to an overall systematization. To be sure, there are parts of criminal law which have experienced very little change in light of human rights. One central tenet of human rights, for example, is the equality of men2 (in a pre-modern reading to include also women) which leads to the criminalization of slavery, slave trade, forced labor and trafficking in human beings. The smuggling of humans, on the other hand, is a much more controversial topic due to the fact that states show a strong desire to criminalize irregular migration. Another pillar of human rights is the human right to property3 which informs a whole range of criminal law provisions for violations of the right to property on land (theft, robbery, etc.) and on water (piracy). By comparison, the right to life is a more difficult concept. Human rights are behind the global drive for abolishing the death penalty4, but a number of other life-related issues are determined less by human rights than by religious and ethical views, such as the criminalization of abortion, aiding and abetting suicide, and euthanasia. Finally, a number of human rights are experiencing a very lively debate, e.g. freedom of speech5 [3] and freedom of religion, consequently there is also a high impact on the development of criminal law. European criminal law, understood as the total of the harmonized national criminal law systems of the EU Member states, offers a good example to study the effects of human rights. In the literature, there is the argument that changes in the understanding of human rights can lead both to criminalization and to de-criminalization. This has also been described as the «sword» function of human rights (using human rights to call for criminalization) and the «shield» function (using human rights law to call for limits to the use of criminal law and even de-criminalization) [1]. Both functions can be observed in a nutshell when analyzing the European criminal law that has emerged in the course of the last decade. For Russia, this article represents a (hopefully timely) contribution to the still nascent discussion on the effects of human rights on criminal law. Despite the Preamble to the newly adopted Constitution of the Russian Federation (RF) which affirms the role of human rights, Article 15 (4) Constitution RF limits the direct impact of human rights law to the universally accepted norms and principles of international law as well as to treaties concluded by the RF. The Constitution therefore appears to be closing the door to cutting-edge developments in international human rights law which are still not universally accepted.
35
Ostapenko, V. N., I. V. Lantukh, and A. P. Lantukh. "Euthanasia and suicide: a medical and social discourse." Reports of Vinnytsia National Medical University 25, no. 1 (March 27, 2021): 107–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.31393/reports-vnmedical-2021-25(1)-20.
Full textAbstract:
Annotation. The problem of suicide and euthanasia has been particularly updated with the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, which caused a strong explosion of suicide, because medicine was not ready for it, and the man was too weak in front of its pressure. The article considers the issue of euthanasia and suicide based on philosophical messages from the position of a doctor, which today goes beyond medicine and medical ethics and becomes one of the important aspects of society. Medicine has achieved success in the continuation of human life, but it is unable to ensure the quality of life of those who are forced to continue it. In these circumstances, the admission of suicide or euthanasia pursues the refusal of the subject to achieve an adequate quality of life; an end to suffering for those who find their lives unacceptable. The reasoning that banned suicide: no one should harm or destroy the basic virtues of human nature; deliberate suicide is an attempt to harm a person or destroy human life; no one should kill himself. The criterion may be that suicide should not take place when it is committed at the request of the subject when he devalues his own life. According to supporters of euthanasia, in the conditions of the progress of modern science, many come to the erroneous opinion that medicine can have total control over human life and death. But people have the right to determine the end of their lives while using the achievements of medicine, as well as the right to demand an extension of life with the help of the same medicine. They believe that in the era of a civilized state, the right to die with medical help should be as natural as the right to receive medical care. At the same time, the patient cannot demand death as a solution to the problem, even if all means of relieving him from suffering have been exhausted. In defense of his claims, he turns to the principle of beneficence. The task of medicine is to alleviate the suffering of the patient. But if physician-assisted suicide and active euthanasia become part of health care, theoretical and practical medicine will be deprived of advances in palliative and supportive therapies. Lack of adequate palliative care is a medical, ethical, psychological, and social problem that needs to be addressed before resorting to such radical methods as legalizing euthanasia.
36
Machinek, Marian. "Życie niegodne życia? Krótka historia eutanazji." Studia Warmińskie 48 (December 31, 2011): 325–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.31648/sw.303.
Full textAbstract:
A historical analysis of a certain idea is not only attempt to reconstruct past events as accurately as possible, but it also aims at better understanding of current intellectual trends. The idea of euthanasia is the best example here. Old justifications to allow to kill on request appear in today’s discussions almost literally. First of all it is compassion for the ill and suffering and necessity to alleviate their excruciating pain. This argument seems to be so clear and evident that the supporters of euthanasia quote it in the first place. Suggestive propaganda, particularly in films and documentaries, which show the demand for euthanasia as a sign of despair or even courage, is to break the instinctive resistance of the society. But when euthanasia is legalized (or acknowledged as not a punishable act), personal autonomy arguments are promoted. The pseudo-right to terminate one’s own life is popularized. This right encapsulates not only suicidal death by the ill person himself, but also patients’ demands for the possibility to be legally killed by doctors within the health care system. Stressing the issue of costs and eugenic aspects only reinforces the impression of a rational and human-friendly decision. The fact that this expanding pro-euthanasia mentality threatens the foundations of our civilization is marginalized and omitted. This mentality recognizes human life as valuable and worthy living only under certain conditions, namely when it has a good quality.
37
Cohen-Almagor, Raphael. "Reflections on the Intriguing Issue of the Right to Die in Dignity." Israel Law Review 29, no. 4 (1995): 677–701. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0021223700014825.
Full textAbstract:
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.
38
LO, Ping Cheung. "儒家的生死價值觀與安樂死." International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine 1, no. 1 (January 1, 1998): 35–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.24112/ijccpm.11324.
Full textAbstract:
LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.在本文筆者要逐一檢討在西方四個常見的贊成安樂死的論據（仁是在、生命贊素、尊嚴、自決），並且指出這四個論據分別與中國儒家的價值觀（仁、所欲有甚於生、士可殺不可辱、泰山與鴻毛）有不同程度的共鳴及相通之處。由於這些共鳴及相通之處只是在某程度上，而非徹底相通，所以透過中國古代的價值觀的相對照，也可以更清楚看出這四個西方論據之性質及其可能限制。筆者的結論是，從儒家的價值觀來看，除了在某極端的情況中，一般來說這四個支持安樂死的論據都是說服力不足。This paper attempts to analyze four major arguments in favor of the moral acceptability of voluntary euthanasia (including physician-assisted-suicide) as found in the West, and tries to assess these arguments through Chinese Confucian ethics and its perspectives on life and death. Through such a cross-cultural dialogue the author concludes that there is some similarity as well as difference in Chinese and western values. The western moral values appealed to in advocating voluntary euthanasia, to a certain extent, can strike an echoing chord in Confucian ethics. In other words, though the debate on euthanasia is a contemporary phenomenon, the arguments and their underlying values in favor of its moral acceptability are not entirely foreign to premodern Confucian ethics. This resonance notwithstanding, the Confucian echoes are also limited. Behind some general agreements are some significant disagreements as well. Hence this cross-cultural dialogue can reveal in a clearer manner the salient traits and possible flaws of the western moral arguments in favor of euthanasia, and can contribute to a multicultural reflection on some contemporary moral controversies.This paper begins by clarifying the etymological meaning of "anle si," the phrase for "euthanasia" in Chinese as well as in Japanese. The root of the phrase can be traced to either Mencius or Pure Land Buddhism. The latter possibility seems more probable, and "anle si" then means a death or dying free of suffering. In this paper, I shall restrict the term "anle si" or "euthanasia", to voluntary, active euthanasia and physician-assisted-suicide.The first common western argument in favor of euthanasia is the argument of mercy. For some patients the dying process is accompanied by such excruciating pain that euthanasia is a good way of release from suffering. Since the patient is on the way to die anyway, such suffering is pointless and is not worth-enduring. Euthanasia for such dying patients is to spare them from such pointless suffering and is therefore a manifestation of mercy. This argument can find an echo in Confucian ethics. The fundamental value in Confucianism is "ren," and one of its meanings is benevolence. According to Mencius, the root of "ren" or benevolence lies in compassion, i.e., feeling intense pain in seeing others suffer. Traditional Chinese medicine also adopts this cardinal Confucian virtue as its fundamental guiding norm, hence the dictum that medicine is "renxin renshu" (benevolence and benevolent art). Thus if the premise "Euthanasia is the only way or best way to eliminate pain in the dying process" is empirically true, one can infer that euthanasia can be justified by Confucian ethics of ren. However, in light of the recent progress in palliative medicine and hospice care, the aforementioned premise can be empirically true only in very limited circumstances, which are analogous to a torture scene in the recent Chinese novel, then turned into movie, The Red Sorghum. (The author also observes that the hospice philosophy is more in consonance with the Taoist philosophy of Zhuangzi.)The second common western argument in favor of euthanasia is the argument of the quality of life. It has been argued that some sufferers of disease and accidents do not want to live anymore not because of intractable pain, but because of the irreversible and unacceptable low level of the quality of life (e.g., in Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, ALS, MS, quadriplegic, etc.). Since the condition is incurable, and the persons involved would rather die than to endure this "living hell," euthanasia is liberation from this bondage. Confucianism does not subscribe to the doctrine of the sanctity of biological life either, and places heavy emphasis on the quality of life, to be defined with reference to ren and yi (i.e., in the wide sense of supreme virtue), rather than on the quantity of life (i.e., longevity). To live out one's life to its natural limit is not in itself desirable. In order to secure a high quality of life, in some circumstances, one has to be prepared to die, even by taking matters into one’s hand, lest what is going to transpire in the natural life span will decrease the quality of life. However, the limit of the Confucian echo is that Confucianism cares largely the moral quality of life, and cares very little about the biological quality of life. As long as the low quality of biological life is not to affect adversely one’s moral quality of life, there is no good reason to terminate one’s biological life.The third common western argument in favor of euthanasia is the argument of death with dignity. According to this argument, our biological condition can be so bad (e.g., loss of control, being brought back to the infant condition, in a state of zombie) that it is a humiliation to our sense of dignity. Such an assault on our dignity can be more intolerable than physical pain. Euthanasia can therefore deliver us from such an undignified state of existence. In Confucianism, especially since the Han Dynasty, to commit suicide in order to avoid humiliation, disgrace, and dishonor is not only desirable, but also obligatory. Such an idea of "a man of integrity prefers death to humiliation" is even accepted by a number of Chinese intellectuals during the so-called "Cultural Revolution." However, historically the Confucian endorsement of death with dignity is largely limited to the cases in which the assault on human dignity came from an external source (from enemies, emperor, government), and such an assault is not a universal predicament. Furthermore, in those circumstances in which to commit suicide is the only way to avoid humiliation it happens because one’s destiny is controlled by hostile forces; there is no friendly force at hand to make one feel better. In the contemporary case of euthanasia, in contrast, the assault on human dignity comes from an internal source (disease, old age, bodily and mental decay all stem from our mortal and corruptible body) and is therefore a universal human phenomenon. Unless we conceive disease and sickness as an enemy, Confucian ethics would not view our deteriorating biological condition as an assault on human dignity. If we accept that our mortal embodied life is a part of our human condition, we can hardly say that bodily and mental decay is undignified. Besides, especially when palliative and hospice care are available, a patient is not captured and isolated in a maleficent environment, but is surrounded by health care professionals who are there to help us. After all, one purpose of hospice care is to help patients to maintain their dignity while they are travelling in this last stage of the journey of life. Hence the Confucian endorsement of euthanasia as death with dignity is quite limited.The fourth common western argument in favor of euthanasia is the argument of self-determination. According to the cherished western value of autonomy, an individual should be given the liberty to decide on things that matter much to him or her. Like the decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, education, etc., the decision on how and when to die is one of the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime. Hence we have the right to die; some even claim that this is a human right, both a negative right (whose correlative duty is nonintervention in suicide attempts) and a positive right (whose correlative duty is suicide assistance). After all, whose life is it anyway? In Confucian values, individual autonomy has never been a cherishedvalue; nor has there been any human rights thinking. That one can decide on the time and circumstances of one’s death is only implied. According to Confucian values one should choose a good death (good in the moral sense) even by actively bringing it about. Since "ought" implies "can," that in some circumstances a person ought to commit suicide implies that the person is morally permissible to commit suicide. However, the Confucian echo of pro-euthanasia argument is the weakest here. The western argument is concerned with the permissibility of suicide and euthanasia, whereas Confucian ethics is concerned with the impermissibility of not committing suicide. In other words, the western argument is concerned with the permissibility of all suicide, regardless of its worth. Confucian ethics, on the other hand, is concerned with only the permissibility of some suicide, those that are deemed morally worthy. The western argument is concerned with the right of euthanasia, but Confucian ethics is only concerned with the rightness, the right conduct, or the right exercise of the right, of euthanasia. Furthermore, the ideas of self-ownership and individual sovereignty are entirely foreign to Confucian values.To conclude, the Confucian echo of these four western arguments varies. The resonance is most prominent in the first argument and weakest in the last argument. This cross-cultural comparison should be instructive to Chinese as well as to the people in the West because it shows which values are universal and which are not. For example, the western society has the tendency to view the value of autonomy as self-evident ("We hold these truths to be self-evident......"), but this value is obviously not self-evident to the Confucian mind. Who is right, and who is wrong? That the Confucian endorsement of euthanasia is only limited should give something to every member of the global village to ponder about.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 220 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.
39
Oliynyk, N. М. "Problems of bioethics in modern medicine." PROBLEMS OF UNINTERRUPTED MEDICAL TRAINING AND SCIENCE 43, no. 3-4 (December 2021): 33–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.31071/promedosvity2021.03-04.033.
Full textAbstract:
Modern scientific advances in medical science and practice require a new perspective on the life and rights of the individual, starting from its embryo in the womb, and therefore the discussions devoted to the study of various aspects of the human right to health and life are simply condemned to a particular relevance in current conditions. Modern bioethics is designed to address ethical issues of medicine and biology, as well as related technologies, considering social, legal and environmental aspects. The objective of the study is to identify current ethical issues in medicine and biology as well as related technologies, considering social, legal and environmental aspects. The article analyzes the directions for the development of bioethics in the health system, human rights as a source of bioethical principles and behavioral criteria in various fields of its application. The bioethics problems of the major achievements of modern biological and medical sciences – stem cell therapy, human cloning, euthanasia, organ and tissue transplantation, certain aspects of resuscitation, which often conflict with moral and ethical criteria. The problem of emerging infections that create local or international emergencies is discussed. A clear example is the pandemic of a new disease – the COVID-19, which confirms humanity’s unpreparability to resist the spread of respiratory viral infections. Conclusion. Modern biological and medical research requires a rethinking of existing bioethical and legal postulates. They must go through a certain path of transformation to meet the requirements of today. It is important to improve the legal regulation without which the boundary between the subject and the object of study will remain potentially uncertain.
40
Grabowska, Joanna, and Anna Chodorowska. "„Dobra śmierć” na tle regulacji prawnych w Polsce." Studia Prawnoustrojowe, no. 42 (April 9, 2019): 173–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.31648/sp.5010.
Full textAbstract:
The “right to life” of every human being, understood as independent of the will of the legislator, natural law, does not find in the current legal system a contrario, the “right to die”. In Polish law, not all forms of euthanasia are punishable. First of all, euthanasia is forbidden, i.e. killing a second person under the influence of compassion caused by a severe and incurable disease and related suffering, after the thought of art. 150 of the Act of 6 June 1997, the Penal Code. This is a privileged type of murder, i.e. threatened by a more lenient criminal sanction than an ‘ordinary’ murder. For the murder of euthanasia from 3 months to 5 years of imprisonment, however, there is the possibility of extraordinary mitigation of punishment, and even waiving its imposition. Of course, not every murder under the influence of compassion and on demand can be a milder responsibility for the offender. A person inflicted on demand by someone who is insane or moribund or underage will be an ‘ordinary’ murder. In addition, there must be serious reasons for the demand for homicide (severe suffering). It will not be euthanasia, but an ‘ordinary’ homicide committed at the request of eg a melancholy with a broken heart. Euthanasia is not only an action (eg injection of poison), but also abandonment (for example, not ordering a life-supporting drug – only for a doctor and nurse).
41
Sabev, Nikola. "PALLIATIVE CARE AND EUTHANASIA – CONVERGENCE POINTS AND PUBLIC ATTITUDES." Teacher of the future 31, no. 4 (June 5, 2019): 1113–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.35120/kij31041113s.
Full textAbstract:
The palliative care for patients focuses primarily on reducing suffering through all stages of the disease, regardless of its form and stage - acute, chronic (compensated and decompensated) or terminal. The palliative medicine is based on an interdisciplinary approach, including the active work of professionals from different fields - physicians, pharmacists, health care professionals, social workers, pedagogues, psychologists whose efforts are aimed at limiting physical, psycho-emotional and social deficits, accompanying mostly the advanced diseases. The palliative care is an integral part of the general health care and is aimed not only at a specific patient or condition, but also supports people and their families through the different stages of their lives. This implies a wide range of knowledge, skills, beliefs and attitudes to provide adequate and comprehensive care for all, especially in the presence of an advanced stage of illness with a focus on the quality of life, the onset of death and overcoming the grief of the loss of a close person. Many international documents on bioethics address the right to life as a human right and dignity, complementing this conclusion with the right to a dignified death. Thus, the euthanasia as a terminal approach and a means of resolving the problem of ending the life, began to penetrate into modern medicine under the influence of a number of factors - scientific, moral, legal, economic, religious, philosophical and social. This makes it more and more from a matter of death (which is inevitable for all organisms) in a managing of the process of dying and its associated unfavorable events such as fear, sorrow and loneliness. It is possible to offer a help in finalizing the life process, where the role of the patient can vary from very active to absolute passive. From the antiquity to the modern times in the different societies, there are different perceptions and attitudes about the occurrence of the death and its support. The proposed paper examines the main components of the palliative care, their organization, goals, methodologies and outcomes, offering an analysis of the awareness and the attitude of a modern Bulgarian population as well as the existing attitudes about the introduction and legalization of the euthanasia as a method of application in patients with terminal or untreated disease.
42
Dopelt, Keren, Dganit Cohen, Einat Amar-Krispel, Nadav Davidovitch, and Paul Barach. "Facing Death: Attitudes toward Physician-Assisted End of Life among Physicians Working at a Tertiary-Care-Hospital in Israel." International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18, no. 12 (June 13, 2021): 6396. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18126396.
Full textAbstract:
The demand for medical assistance in dying remains high and controversial with a large knowledge gap to support optimal patient care. The study aimed to explore physicians’ attitudes regarding euthanasia and examine the factors that related to these attitudes. We surveyed 135 physicians working at a tertiary-care hospital in Israel. The questionnaire was comprised of demographic and background information, DNR procedure information, encounters with terminally ill patients, familiarity with the law regarding end-of-life questions, and Attitudes toward Euthanasia. About 61% agreed that a person has the right to decide whether to expedite their own death, 54% agreed that euthanasia should be allowed, while 29% thought that physicians should preserve a patients’ life even when they expressed the wish to die. A negative statistically significant relationship was found between the level of religiosity and attitudes toward euthanasia. The physicians’ attitudes towards euthanasia are quite positive when compared to other countries. The data shows a conflict of values: the sacredness of human life versus the desire to alleviate patients’ suffering. The Coronavirus-19 outbreak reinforces the importance of supporting physicians’ efforts to provide ethical and empathic communication for terminally ill patients. Future studies should aim to improve our understanding and treatment of the specific types of suffering that lead to end-of-life requests.
43
Samuels, Alec. "Complicity in Suicide." Journal of Criminal Law 69, no. 6 (December 2005): 535–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1350/jcla.2005.69.6.535.
Full textAbstract:
This article addresses the extent to which, if at all, a person may lawfully ‘help’ another person, for example a terminally ill spouse, to take his own life or submit to euthanasia. It considers what intent is required to be proved for a crime and the situation where the intent is mercy. In addition, it looks at the position of a survivor of a suicide pact and whether there is a human right to die. Other questions raised are: How near to voluntary euthanasia is English law now? Is an advance decision ‘no treatment if I am terminally ill’ legally valid? What is the legal duty of the doctor towards a terminally ill patient?
44
Meliakova, Yuliia Vasylivna, Inna Igorivna Kovalenko, Svitlana Borysivna Zhdanenko, Eduard Anatolievich Kalnytskyi, and Tetiana Vasyliivna Krasiuk. "Posthuman Freedom as the Right to Unlimited Pleasure." Revista Amazonia Investiga 10, no. 39 (May 5, 2021): 62–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.34069/ai/2021.39.03.6.
Full textAbstract:
Berdyaev, N. A. (1951). The kingdom of the spirit and the kingdom of Caesar. Paris: Umca-Press. Recovered from: https://vtoraya-literatura.com/pdf/berdyaev_tsarstvo_dukha_i_tsastvo_kesarya_1951__ocr.pdf. Berlinger, N., & Solomon, M. Z. (2018). Becoming Good Citizens of Aging Societies. Hastings center report, Vol. 48(3), 2–9. Bostrom, N. (2003). Are You Living in a Simulation? Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 53(211), 243–255. Bostrom, N. (2016). Development of values. Artificial Intelligence: Stages. Threats. Strategies. Moscow: Publishing House "Mann, Ivanov and Ferber". Recovered from: https://element.ru/bookclub/chapters/433044/Iskusstvennyy_intellekt_Glava_iz_knigi. Goryachkovskaya, A. N. (2014). Philosophy of transhumanism: on the surrogates of being, the abduction of identity and euthanasia of humanity. Bulletin of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University. Series: Theory of Culture and Philosophy of Science, Vol. 1092, Issue 50. Recovered from: http://periodicals.karazin.ua/thcphs/issue/view/209. Gould, C. C. (2018). Solidarity and the problem of structural injustice in healthcare. Bioethics, Vol. 32(9), 541–552. Guerrini, C., Lewellyn, M., Majumder, M. et al. (2019). Donors, authors, and owners: how is genomic citizen science addressing interests in research outputs? BMC Medical Ethics, Vol. 20, Issue 1, Article number 84. Habermas, J. (2002). The future of human nature. Towards liberal eugenics. Moskva: Ves' Mir. Haker, H. (2019). Habermas and the Question of Bioethics. European journal for Philosophy of Religion, Issue 4, 61–86. Heidegger, M. (1967). Being And Time. Max Niemeyer loading facility in Tübinge. Recovered from: https://taradajko.org/get/books/sein_und_zeit.pdf. Kakkori, L. (2018). Postmodern as Secularization in Philosophy of Education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, Vol. 50(14), Special issue: SI, 1639–1640. Kroker, A., & Cook, D. (1986). The Postmodern Scene. Excremental Culture and Hyper-Aesthetics. Montreal: New World Perspectives. Kurzweil, R. (2012). How to create a mind: the secret of human thought revealed. New York: Penguin Books. Lipovetsky, G. (2015). Time Against Time, or The Hypermodern Society. In D. Rudrum and N. Stavris (Ed.), Supplanting the Postmodern. An Anthology of Writings on the Arts and Culture of the Early 21st Century (p. 191–208). New York; London; New Delhi; Sydney: Bloomsbury Academic. Lobanov, V.A (2020). Transhumanism in the interpretation of V. A. Lobanov. Samizdat Magazine. Recovered from: http://samlib.ru/l/lobanow_w_a/samlibrullobanow_w_amsworddocshtml-2.shtml. Meliakova, Y., Kovalenko, I., Zhdanenko, S., & Kalnytskyi, E. (2020). Performance in the Postmodern Culture and Law. Amazonia Investiga, 9(27), 340–348. https://amazoniainvestiga.info/index.php/amazonia/article/view/1247 Melyakova, Yu. V. (2018). Being of law and being in law: from performative to performance. Bulletin of the National University "Yaroslav the Wise Law Academy of Ukraine". Series: Philosophy, Vol. 1(36), 90–113. Odorcak, J. (2019). Exorganic Posthumanism and Brain-Computer Interface Technologies (BCI). Postmodern openings, Vol. 10(4), 193-208. Pavlov, A. V. (2019). Images of modernity in the 21st century: hypermodernism. Philosophical Journal, Vol. 12(2), 20–33. Piarce, D. (2015). The Hedonistic Imperative. eBook. Recovered from: https://ubq124.wordpress.com/2019/12/22/the-hedonistic-imperative-pdf. Polyakova, O. V. (2017). Commodification of the dead body: ethical and legal aspects. Bulletin of the RSUH. Series "Psychology. Pedagogy. Education", Vol. 2(8), 118–128. Recovered from: http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/kommodifikatsiya-mertvogo-tela-etiko-pravovye-aspekty Popova, O. V. (2016). Man, its price and value: to the problem of body commodification in scientific knowledge. Epistemology and philosophy of science, Vol. 49(3), 140-157. Recovered from: http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/chelovek-ego-tsena-i-tsennost-k-probleme-kommodifikatsii-tela-v-nauchnom-poznanii. Popova, O. V., Tishchenko, P. D., & Shevchenko, S. Yu. (2018). Neuroethics and biopolitics of biotechnology for cognitive improvement of human improvement. Philosophy questions, Vol. 7, 96–108. Russian Transhumanist Movement (2020). About the possibilities of self-upgrade and life extension. Recovered from: http://transhumanism-russia.ru/content/view/629/94/ Sandu, A., Vlad, L. (2018). Beyond Technological Singularity – the Posthuman Condition. Postmodern openings, Vol. 9(1), 91-102. Sartre, J.P. (1989). Existentialism is humanism. In: Twilight of the Gods. Moscow: Politizdat, 319-344. Strandbrink, P. (2018). Nostalgia and Shrinkage: Philosophy and culture under post-postmodern conditions. Educational Philosophy and Theory, Vol. 50(14), 1407–1408. Twenge, J. M. (2006). Generation Me: Why Today’s Young Americans Are More Confident, Assertive, Entitled – and More Miserable Than Ever Before. New York: ATRIA paperback. Retrieved from http://www.amazon.co.uk/Generation-Americans-Confident-Assertive-Entitled/dp/1476755566. Twenge, J. M. (2017). iGen: Why Today’s Super-Connected Kids Are Growing Up Less Rebellious, More Tolerant, Less Happy – and Completely Unprepared for Adulthood. New York: ATRIA books. Retrieved from http://www.amazon.com/iGen-Super-Connected-Rebellious-Happy-Adulthood/dp/1501151983. United Nations (1997). Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights. Recovered from http://www.un.org/ru/documents/decl_conv/declarations/human_genome.shtml United Nations (2005). Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights. Recovered from: http://www.un.org/ru/documents/decl_conv/declarations/bioethics_and_hr.shtml Yong, L. (2019). Moral Ambivalence: Relativism or Pluralism? Acta analytica-international periodical for Philosophy in the analytical tradition, Vol. 34(4), 473–491. Zinovyev, A. (2006). Global Human. Booksonline. Recovered from: http://booksonline.com.ua/view.php?book=97560 (in Russian).
45
LI, Hon-Lam. "動物權益問題." International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine 3, no. 4 (January 1, 2001): 101–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.24112/ijccpm.31414.
Full textAbstract:
LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.本文指出「種類主義」及「反種類主義」都不可取，唯一令人信服的觀點，是人類與眾多類動物都有不同的內在價值，只不過是程度問題而已。但由此卻引申自兩個問題，均當人類及動物兩者的利益互相衝突時而產生。第一個問題是當人類較次要的利益與動物較重要的利益有所衝突時而產生的，筆者指出由於我們要也考慮人類較高的內在價值和動物較低的內在價值，此問題是解決不了的。第二個問題包涵性較廣，包括所有人類侵犯動物利益的情況，更包括犧牲一定數量的動物的生命，以研製可救回更多人的生命的藥物，問題是究竟動物有沒有權利－－尤其是生存權。筆者指出這問題現時無法解決，因為一來我們對權利的必要及充分條件並不清楚，二來由魚蝦類、爬行類、鳥類到哺乳類動物及人類這一連接的幅度，很難說哪些動物有生存權，哪些則沒有，而又不牽涉隨意性。所以本文並不打算對這些問題提出答案，而是把問題的結構突顯出來。Until relatively recently, ethics has been a subject involving only human persons. Whether the issue concerns euthanasia, pornography, capital punishment, or world hunger, only human persons are involved. Since then, moral issues have arisen that involve not only human persons, but also non-human animals. This is a significant change, because the ethics involving only human persons is ill-adapted for problems involving not only them, but also non-human animals. In this paper, I argue that the traditional ethics is inadequate for solving the problem of animal research and non-vegetarianism, and that arguments trying to show that animals can be sacrificed in experiments in order to save human lives is inconclusive.There are three different views on the moral status of non-human animals. The first is the speciesist view that only human beings have moral status. The second view is the anti-speciesist view according to which human and non-human animals have equal moral status. Both views hold that moral status is an all-or-nothing matter. In contrast, the third view holds that moral status is a-matter-of-degree, and that human and non-human animals have moral status, or intrinsic value, but to different degrees. On this view, moral status, or intrinsic value, of an animal is dependent on, and derived from, its capacity to have a rich life, which is in turn dependent on its experiential capacity. Given that human beings have the capacity to a richer life than other animals, they also have higher intrinsic value or moral status. Similarly, mammals also have higher intrinsic value than birds, which in turn would have higher intrinsic value than reptiles, which has higher intrinsic value than fish, shrimps, etc. I claim that the "matter-of-degree" view is the only plausible view on the comparative moral status between humans and non-humans.However, this view leads to a problem. If we can save either (1) a human being from injury, or (2) a dog from death, but not both, which should we save? This is a different problem from the traditional problems in which a human being's claim is compared with the claim of another human being or human beings, because in these problems only the relative importance of the competing claims are at issue. Thus, in deciding whether people have the right to defame others as a special case of right to free speech, for instance, we take into account the pros and cons of allowing defamation versus the pros and cons of prohibiting defamation. In other words, we have to weigh and compare the competing claims of potential defamers versus those of potential victims. However, in the case of choosing to save either a human being from injury, or a dog from death, an extra consideration is in play, namely, the intrinsic value of the human versus the ( lower) intrinsic value of the dog. But the problem due to this extra "variable" seems to have no solution, because there is at present no ethical calculus or any conceptual schemes by which to compare the lesser claim of a human being and the greater claim of a lesser entity. Thus, if we compare (1) a human being's claim to the taste of a cow's meat, and (2) a cow's claim to life, we do not know how to make the comparison, because (1) and (2) are incommensurable.To use an analogy, we can solve an equation with one variable (e. g., 2x+4=8), but cannot solve an equation with two variables (e.g., 2x+y+4=8), because there is one unknown too many. The moral analogue in the issue of animal rights is as follows. We can solve the problem of competing claim s in which two entities of different intrinsic value have claims of the same type. (We know we should save a human person's life rather than a dog's life, if we can only save one of them.) Moreover, we can solve the problem in which two entities of the same intrinsic value have claims of different type and different importance. (We should save a stranger from dying, rather than another stranger from injury.) However, we cannot solve the problem in which two entities of different intrinsic value compete for claims of contrary importance－that is, when a greater entity makes a lesser claim whereas a lesser entity makes a greater claim, because there is one unknown too many. (Thus, the utilitarian axiom that every person is to count for one is not only important in its own right, but is also a vital premise without which no maximization of utility could possibly begin. For by assuming that everyone is equal, utilitarianism assumes everyone's intrinsic value to be equal. This allows utilitarianism to hold "one variable" constant, and thereby in effect eliminate it from "the equation. ")Speciesists only focus on the relative moral status (or intrinsic value) between humans and non-humans, whereas anti-speciesists stress the difference in intrinsic value between humans and non-humans. The truth, however, is that we have to take both variables into account, and yet there seems no way to combine both variables in the issue of non-vegetarianism. To give it a name, call this the two-variable problem.In many cases of animal experimentation, the two-variable problem has no relevance, since by sacrificing the lives of a relatively small number of non-human mammals, we can prevent the mortality (and morbidity) of a greater number of human beings. It looks as though we have a net gain both in terms of lives as well as in terms of intrinsic value. But there lurks the question as to whether non- human animals have rights in general, and the right to life, in particular. If non-human animals have the right to life, then we are morally prohibited from using them as materials for experimentation, or as a source of food. On the other hand, if they don't have such a right, (though it does not mean we can therefore treat them in whatever way we like) it would seem to be justifiable to sacrifice them for experiments that can save many more human lives.However, I argue that to answer the question whether animals have the right to life, we are faced with two major hurdles. First, we do not know what would constitute the necessary and sufficient conditions for having the right to life. Second, the intrinsic value from lowly creatures such as shrimps and fish to homo sapiens represents a continuous spectrum. To determine which type of creatures would have the right to life, and which would not, will surely involve a certain degree of arbitrariness. Since arbitrary solutions are not good philosophical solutions, animal rights issues as well as other issues have remained unsolved. These include the problem of personal identity, in which memory is a matter of degree whereas personal identity is all-or-nothing. The problem of whether a fetus is a person is another instance: A fetus grows continuously, but whether it is a person is supposed to be an all-or-nothing matter. Finally, the search for a definition of knowledge is another example. Knowledge is supposed to be all -or- nothing, but the justification of belief is a matter of degree.I try to unveil the deeper structure of the problem of animal rights. As I said, those who accept the all-or-nothing views would have an easier dealing with the issue of animal rights. For if speciesism is correct, we can feed on animals, and use them for experimentation. If, on the other hand, anti-speciesism is correct, non-vegetarianism is forced on us, and animal experimentation must be banned. This is because in assuming either that non-human animals have intrinsic value equal to that of human persons, or that they have no intrinsic value at all, the two-variable problem is thereby reduced to a one-variable problem, which is solvable. But such reduction is premised upon implausible all -or-nothing views.However, since speciesism and anti-speciesism are both implausible, the fact that the issues of animal rights would have been solvable if they were plausible is unhelpful. I don't know whether－nor do I suppose－that the problems of animal rights are in the end unsolvable. But I hope to have shown why there appears to be no satisfactory solution to these problems, at least as at present.One reason why all -or- nothing views fail is that the moral reality is messier and more complex than they portray. In philosophy, views that take short cuts (e.g., some forms of reductionism) often achieve solution s by cutting the reality down in size or scope. The residual reality is manageable. But the desire for solutions and simplicity is satisfied at great costs, because the problem attacked is no longer the original issue.Moreover, as Thomas Nagel observes, "[s] implicity and elegance are never reasons to think that a philosophical theory is true." Perhaps, as Nagel also points out, "one should trust problems over solutions, ... and pluralistic discord over systematic harmony." At the very least, Nagel seems to be correct about the issue of animal rights. For the all-or-nothing views are forms of reductionism that cut down the moral reality in size, that is, by cutting down a two-dimensional issue into a one-dimensional one.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 112 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.
46
Morgan, Lynn M. "“Life Begins When They Steal Your Bicycle”: Cross-Cultural Practices of Personhood at the Beginnings and Ends of Life." Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 34, no. 1 (2006): 8–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-720x.2006.00003.x.
Full textAbstract:
A friend once told me I was wasting my time writing about cross-cultural perspectives on the beginnings of life. “Your work is interesting for its curiosity value,” he said, “but fundamentally worthless. What happens in other cultures is totally irrelevant to what is happening here.” Those were discouraging words, but as I followed the American debates about the beginnings and ends of life, it seemed he was right. Anthropologists have written a great deal about birth and death rites in other societies and about non-western notions of personhood, but to date our findings have had little impact on American policy, ethics, or law. The recognized experts on contentious topics such as abortion and euthanasia tend to come from the fields of philosophy, bioethics, theology, law, and biology, but rarely from the social sciences. I was a bit surprised, therefore, to be invited to address the Thomas A. Pitts Memorial Lectureship on “Defining the Beginning and the End of Human Life.”
47
Abraham, CPA, MBA, FPSQua, Lucille A., and Mary Caroline N. Castaño. "Ethical Standards/Issues: Are They Relevant to Quality Patient Care?" 11th GLOBAL CONFERENCE ON BUSINESS AND SOCIAL SCIENCES 11, no. 1 (December 9, 2020): 21. http://dx.doi.org/10.35609/gcbssproceeding.2020.11(21).
Full textAbstract:
Ethical standards/issues are sensitive matters which could mean either a life or death situation. This study involves issues like abortion, contraception, euthanasia and sanctity (holiness) of family life. It aims to determine if ethical standards/issues are relevant to quality patient care. Ethical issues can be divisive but a healthcare professional or worker does not have to be a Catholic or Christian in order to understand that one has to be always in favor of life, of human life. Any person for that matter has the natural moral law or the law imprinted in the heart and mind which enables one to do good and avoid evil, to choose what is morally right against what is morally wrong. For what is really important? To save one's life but lose it in the end or to lose one's life but save it in the end. Keywords: Ethical issues, quality patient care
48
Ohly, Christoph. "Recht am Geschenk des Lebens?" Zeitschrift für Lebensrecht: Volume 30, Issue 3 30, no. 3 (July 1, 2021): 235–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.3790/zfl.30.3.235.
Full textAbstract:
Der Beitrag untersucht und systematisiert die kirchenrechtlichen Perspektiven des Schreibens Samaritanus bonus über die Sorge an Personen in kritischen Phasen und in der Endphase des Lebens. Dabei wird vornehmlich das Ziel verfolgt, die rechtlichen Dimensionen der Seelsorge an Kranken und Sterbenden in der Verkündigung des Wortes Gottes, in der Feier der Sakramente (vornehmlich Beichte, Krankensalbung und Eucharistie) und der Caritas zum Schutz des menschlichen Lebens zu erfassen. Zugleich wird die damit verbundene Frage erörtert, wie kirchliches Recht als solches auf staatliche Gesetze reagieren kann, die darauf abzielen, durch Suizid und Euthanasie ein Recht am oder gegen das Geschenk des Lebens zu legitimieren. The article examines and systematises the canonical perspectives of the letter Samaritanus bonus on the care of persons in the critical and terminal phases of life. The main aim is to grasp the legal dimensions of pastoral care for the sick and dying in the proclamation of the Word of God, in the celebration of the sacraments (primarily confession, extreme unction and Eucharist) and in caritas for the protection of human life. At the same time, the related question of how ecclesiastical law as such can respond to state laws aimed at legitimising a right to or against the gift of life through suicide and euthanasia is discussed.
49
Shabalin, V. N., and S. N. Shatokhina. "Medical ethics in relationship with moribund patient." Bulletin of the Medical Institute "REAVIZ" (REHABILITATION, DOCTOR AND HEALTH) 11, no. 5 (October 27, 2021): 5–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.20340/vmi-rvz.2021.5.edt.1.
Full textAbstract:
The continuous changes in the basic values of modern society are based on transformations in the field of intellectual communication, an avalanche-like increase in the volume of new knowledge, the emergence of new medical technology, and a sharp increase in attention to human rights. These processes exacerbate deontological problems, which are most difficult to manifest when a doctor comes into contact with a dying patient. Purpose of the study. To improve the quality of medical care for a patient in a terminal state. Research results. For most people, death is associated with severe physical and spiritual suffering. The doctor can alleviate this suffering only with a deep understanding of the phenomenon of death, both from scientific and religious positions. The article analyzes the philosophical foundations of medical ethics, knowledge of which is necessary for a doctor when communicating with a dying patient. The modern understanding of death as a natural event necessary to support the development of living nature is given. It is shown that our society has not yet developed the principles of the culture of death. In connection with the development of modern medical technologies, it became necessary to search for new criteria for death. The modern legal and moral interpretation of the human right to death with dignity is considered. The difficulty of communicating information about a fatal diagnosis to a patient is noted: when a bitter truth is possible, and when a “holy” lie is needed. The proposition is put forward that the complexity and contradictory nature of the problem of euthanasia is solved by providing the terminal patient with high-quality palliative care. Conclusion. Despite all the wonderful judgments about the necessity and importance of death in the development of mankind, the tragedy of personal death cannot be removed even by the most optimistic philosophy. However, a doctor, armed with modern knowledge, possessing modern deontological methods, endowed with high moral qualities, can significantly reduce the level of feeling of this tragedy. Death is an important stage in a person's life, the confidence of all living people that their terminal period will be provided with proper care and attention, will greatly improve the quality and the entire period of a person's life.
50
LI, Jianhui, and Yaming LI. "儒家視角下的死亡的尊嚴." International Journal of Chinese & Comparative Philosophy of Medicine 14, no. 1 (January 1, 2016): 35–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.24112/ijccpm.141606.
Full textAbstract:
LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.在當代的醫療實踐中，各種新的醫療技術在臨終階段的應用引發了關於如何維護死亡的尊嚴的激烈爭論。爭論的焦點集中在對什麼是人的尊嚴和什麼是死亡的尊嚴的概念的不同理解上。人的尊嚴概念在當代西方的倫理學中尚沒有得到清晰的闡釋，死亡的尊嚴概念更是存在混亂。儒家倫理學則可以在這種討論中為問題的解決提供新的思路。本文試圖重建儒家的人的尊嚴和死亡的尊嚴的基本含義，並對死亡的尊嚴與人的生物學生命的關係，死亡的尊嚴與人的痛苦的關係，死亡的尊嚴同人的自主性的關係，以及死亡的尊嚴同社會公平正義之間的關係做出分析說明。儒家關於人的尊嚴的觀點有助於化解西方死亡倫理研究中出現的概念混亂和理論矛盾。What does a death have dignity? In modern healthcare, the wide use of new technology has generated confusion around how to define and protect human dignity, especially in the case of death and dying. Those who advocate the legalization of assisted suicide often appeal to the right to “die with dignity” and the right to individual autonomy. The problem is that it is very difficult to justify one particular understanding of human dignity in the contemporary pluralistic world through a rational formulation without defining dignity.In this paper, the authors attempt to respond to the current debate on euthanasia and assisted suicide from a Confucian perspective. The paper first defines the Confucian concept of human dignity and shows how the concept could be used in the case of dignity in death and dying. The authors argue that in Confucianism, there are two kinds of dignity: One is intrinsic dignity, which is endowed by Heaven on everyone, and the other is extrinsic dignity, which arises from the cultivation of virtues. This extrinsic dignity is also called “personal dignity.” Unlike the individual-oriented human dignity model, Confucian ethics argue for a family-oriented model of human dignity. That is to say, the Confucian ideal of human dignity is not satisfied by a concept of human dignity that is centered on individual rights and freedom of choice; instead, it focuses on relations in a concrete community in which a person’s human dignity is actualized through morals and virtues. In the case of euthanasia and assisted suicide, therefore, the decision should not be solely based on freedom of choice, but on what kinds of values and obligations the person has. In addition, the paper shows that the Confucian view of human dignity does not support the idea of prolonging life through technological means without restraints.DOWNLOAD HISTORY | This article has been downloaded 1292 times in Digital Commons before migrating into this platform.