JME

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER


[Advanced]
Journal of Medical Ethics 2007;33:519-521; doi:10.1136/jme.2006.020073
Copyright © 2007 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & Institute of Medical Ethics.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Shaw, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Shaw, D.

CLINICAL ETHICS

The body as unwarranted life support: a new perspective

The body as unwarranted life support: a new perspective on euthanasia

David Shaw

Correspondence to:
David Shaw
Centre for Ethics, Philosophy and Public Affairs, Department of Moral Philosophy, University of St Andrews, Edgecliffe, The Scores, St Andrews, Fife KY16 9AL, UK; dms11@st-andrews.ac.uk Original version received 1 December 2006

Revised version received 22 January 2007

Accepted for publication 31 January 2007

It is widely accepted in clinical ethics that removing a patient from a ventilator at the patient’s request is ethically permissible. This constitutes voluntary passive euthanasia. However, voluntary active euthanasia, such as giving a patient a lethal overdose with the intention of ending that patient’s life, is ethically proscribed, as is assisted suicide, such as providing a patient with lethal pills or a lethal infusion. Proponents of voluntary active euthanasia and assisted suicide have argued that the distinction between killing and letting die is flawed and that there is no real difference between actively ending someone’s life and "merely" allowing them to die. This paper shows that, although this view is correct, there is even less of a distinction than is commonly acknowledged in the literature. It does so by suggesting a new perspective that more accurately reflects the moral features of end-of-life situations: if a patient is mentally competent and wants to die, his body itself constitutes unwarranted life support unfairly prolonging his or her mental life.

Abbreviations: AS, assisted suicide; VAE, voluntary active euthanasia; VPE, voluntary passive euthanasia

Keywords: euthanasia; life support; assisted suicide; brain death; doctor–patient relationship

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

It is widely accepted in clinical ethics that removing a patient from a ventilator at the patient’s request is ethically permissible. This is often termed voluntary passive euthanasia (VPE), although there is controversy over this terminology and in particular over the idea that ending a patient’s life in this way is any less direct than other means.1 Conversely, voluntary active euthanasia (VAE), such as giving a patient a lethal overdose with the intention of ending that patient’s life, is ethically proscribed, as is assisted suicide (AS), such as providing a patient with lethal pills or a lethal infusion. Proponents of VAE and AS have argued that the distinction between killing and letting die is flawed, and that there is no real distinction between actively ending someone’s life and "merely" allowing them to die. This paper will argue that, while this is . . . [Full text of this article]






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2007 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd & Institute of Medical Ethics.