Withholding life prolonging treatment, and self deception
Share this article
Click the icon of the social media platform on which you would like to share this article.
Email this article to a friend
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.
Other content recommended for you
- A case for justified non-voluntary active euthanasia: exploring the ethics of the Groningen Protocol
- Euthanasia and other end of life decisions and care provided in final three months of life: nationwide retrospective study in Belgium
- Passive euthanasia
- Mr Marty’s muddle: a superficial and selective case for euthanasia in Europe
- Comparison of attitudes towards five end-of-life care interventions (active pain control, withdrawal of futile life-sustaining treatment, passive euthanasia, active euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide): a multicentred cross-sectional survey of Korean patients with cancer, their family caregivers, physicians and the general Korean population
- Neonatal euthanasia: moral considerations and criminal liability
- Influence of physicians’ life stances on attitudes to end-of-life decisions and actual end-of-life decision-making in six countries
- End-of-life decisions in medical practice: a survey of doctors in Victoria (Australia)
- Medical murder in Belgium and the Netherlands
- The ethics of killing and letting die: active and passive euthanasia