Affiliation:
1. Canisius College, Buffalo, New York, USA
Abstract
Abstract
The relevance of double effect for end-of-life decision-making has been challenged recently by a number of scholars. The principal reason is that opioids such as morphine do not usually hasten death when administered to relieve pain at the end of life; therefore, no secondary “double” effect is brought about. In my article, I argue against this view, showing how the doctrine of double effect is relevant to the administration of opioids at the end of life. I contend that the prevailing view suffers from a misunderstanding of the nature of double effect, which includes application to risking a grave harm.
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Subject
Philosophy,General Medicine,Issues, ethics and legal aspects
Reference32 articles.
1. Action, intention, and ‘double effect’.;Anscombe,2005
2. Morphine use for terminal cancer patients: An application of the principle of double effect.;Beabout,2001
3. Double Effect: Does it have a proper use in palliative care?;Brody;Journal of Palliative Medicine,1998
4. The ethics of death-hastening or death-causing palliative analgesic administration to the terminally ill;Cavanaugh;Journal of Pain & Symptom Management,1996
5. Aquinas’s account of double effect;Thomist: A Speculative Quarterly Review,1997
Cited by
2 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
1. The Pain Principle;A New Holistic-Evolutive Approach to Pediatric Palliative Care;2022
2. Principles, Paradigms, and Protections;The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy: A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine;2021-10-01