Article Text
Abstract
This paper presents and discusses a recent Israeli proposal to legislate on the rights of the dying patient. A gap exists between elitist biases of the committee proposing the law, and popular values and sentiments. The proposed law divides the dying patients into two groups: “those who wish to go on living” and “those who wish to die”. The former will have a right to life prolonging extraordinary care. It is not clear who would foot the bill for this care. Also it is hard to see how this munificence could fail to discriminate against all other patients. Both the secular ethicists and the rabbis involved in drawing up the proposal accepted the assumption that it is good for some terminal patients to die. The rabbis objected, however, to direct and active interventions that shorten life. The solution arrived at was to install timers in the ventilators so as to allow them to expire automatically unless the patient wishes for their resetting.
- Israel
- Judaism
- religion
- right to die
- terminal care
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
-
↵† The Steinberg report fails to credit Dr Meir and Rabbi Sternbuch for the idea. I do not know why the clock ventilators never materialised. Contemporary legislation had better take lessons from the past. As a matter of fact, according to Waldenberg’s responsum there is no duty to implement artificial life support, and it is also allowed to disconnect them. He actually suggests that there might be a religious duty (mitzvah) to disconnect artificial life support when the patient is suffering. Many discussants of Jewish bioethics who elaborate on other responsa by Waldenberg, ignore this responsum. See—for example: Zohar, Rosner, Sherwin, Dorff, Pellegrino and A I Faden, and Resnicoff.11–16
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- What are the attitudes of strictly-orthodox Jews to clinical trials: are they influenced by Jewish teachings?
- Navigating the chasm between religious and secular perspectives in modern bioethics
- Artificial nutrition and hydration in the patient with advanced dementia: is withholding treatment compatible with traditional Judaism?
- The Holocaust and medical ethics: the voices of the victims
- Allocation of scarce resources during the COVID-19 pandemic: a Jewish ethical perspective
- Withholding artificial feeding from the severely demented: merciful or immoral? Contrasts between secular and Jewish perspectives
- Are healthcare workers obligated to risk themselves during the COVID-19 pandemic according to Jewish law? A response to Solnica et al
- When medical information comes from Nazi atrocities
- COVID-19 vaccine trials with children: the Jewish ethics
- Jewish Medical Ethics