Responses

What makes killing wrong?
Free
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • Responses are moderated before posting and publication is at the absolute discretion of BMJ, however they are not peer-reviewed
  • Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. Removal or editing of responses is at BMJ's absolute discretion
  • If patients could recognise themselves, or anyone else could recognise a patient from your description, please obtain the patient's written consent to publication and send them to the editorial office before submitting your response [Patient consent forms]
  • By submitting this response you are agreeing to our full [Response terms and requirements]

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Dead people ARE totally and irreversibly disabled people

    I would argue that a totally and irreversibly disabled person HAS ceased to exist. Personhood, medically, exists in the brain. If the brain has been made permanently incapable of sustaining coherent thought or experience, it no longer belongs to a person. This view seems to be widely held by relatives of those with Alzheimer's disease, who speak very vividly of the gradual loss the person they once knew and loved. Many p...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    What's wrong about "what makes killing wrong?"

    In a recent article by Walter Sinnott-Armstrong and Franklin G. Miller, the argument is made that ability should be the metric of value among human life and thus the determining factor on what constitutes moral harm when killing. Someone who has permanently lost all abilities no longer has value and killing them would not only fail to add more harm and it would also fail to take away any more value.

    In the author...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on:
    Dead people are not totally and irreversibly disabled people

    Dear sir

    I believe all the commentaries on the piece by Sinnott-Armstrong and Miller miss a really fundamental problem with their account of the wrongness of killing. Sinnott-Armstrong and Miller claim that what makes killing wrong is that it totally and irreversibly disables the person killed. They then infer from this that, if someone is universally and irreversibly disabled, they cannot be wronged if they ar...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.