Article info
Debate
Response to Ronald M Perkin and David B Resnik: The agony of trying to match sanctity of life and patient-centred medical care
- Correspondence to: Dr H Kuhse, Centre for Human Bioethics, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria 3168, Australia; Helga.Kuhse{at}arts.monash.edu.au
Citation
Response to Ronald M Perkin and David B Resnik: The agony of trying to match sanctity of life and patient-centred medical care
Publication history
- Accepted April 8, 2002
- Revised April 8, 2002
- First published August 1, 2002.
Online issue publication
August 01, 2002
Request permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information
Copyright 2002 by the Journal of Medical Ethics
Other content recommended for you
- The agony of agonal respiration: is the last gasp necessary?
- Terminal sedation and the “imminence condition”
- Response to Kuhse
- Weakening the ethical distinction between euthanasia, palliative opioid use and palliative sedation
- A response to critics: weakening the ethical distinction between euthanasia, palliative opioid use and palliative sedation
- Strengthening the ethical distinction between euthanasia, palliative opioid use and palliative sedation
- Double effect: a useful rule that alone cannot justify hastening death
- Expanded terminal sedation in end-of-life care
- The role of the principle of double effect in ethics education at US medical schools and its potential impact on pain management at the end of life
- Moral differences in deep continuous palliative sedation and euthanasia