Article info
The concise argument
The concise argument
- Correspondence to Søren Holm, JME, UK; production.jme{at}bmjgroup.com
Citation
The concise argument
Publication history
- Accepted January 24, 2011
- First published February 16, 2011.
Online issue publication
April 27, 2016
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
© 2011, Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
Other content recommended for you
- The case for physician assisted suicide: how can it possibly be proven?
- Australian pharmacists’ perspectives on physician-assisted suicide (PAS): thematic analysis of semistructured interviews
- Legal physician-assisted suicide in Oregon and The Netherlands: evidence concerning the impact on patients in vulnerable groups—another perspective on Oregon's data
- Legal physician-assisted dying in Oregon and the Netherlands: evidence concerning the impact on patients in “vulnerable” groups
- Gametes or organs? How should we legally classify ovaries used for transplantation in the USA?
- Medical expertise, existential suffering and ending life
- The case for physician assisted suicide: not (yet) proven
- On the relevance of an argument as regards the role of existential suffering in the end-of-life context
- Expressivism at the beginning and end of life
- Dying individuals and suffering populations: applying a population-level bioethics lens to palliative care in humanitarian contexts: before, during and after the COVID-19 pandemic