Abstract
This article is a response to Thomas David Riisfeldt’s paper entitled ‘Weakening the ethical distinction between euthanasia, palliative opioid use and palliative sedation’. It is shown that as far as euthanasia and palliative sedation are concerned, Riisfeldt has not established that a common ground, or a similarity, between the two is the relief of suffering. Quite the contrary, this is not characteristic of euthanasia, neither by definition nor from a clinical point of view. Hence, the argument hinges on a conceptually and empirically erroneous premise and is accordingly a non-starter.
Subject
Health Policy,Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous),Issues, ethics and legal aspects,Health (social science)
Reference21 articles.
1. Weakening the ethical distinction between euthanasia, palliative opioid use and palliative sedation
2. Griffiths J , Bood A , Weyers H . Euthanasia and law in the Netherlands. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1998.
3. KNMG/KNMP. Guidelines for the Practice of Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide. Utrecht: The Netherlands. 2012 www.knmg.nl/adviesrichtlijnen/dossiers/euthanasie/viewpoints-and-guidelines-euthanasia.htm
4. Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide: a view from an EAPC Ethics Task Force
5. Materstvedt LJ . Ethical issues in physician aid-in-dying. In: Cherny N , Fallon M , Kaasa S , Portenoy R , Currow D , eds. Oxford textbook of palliative medicine. 6th edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020.
Cited by
11 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献