Document Detail


Double effect: a useful rule that alone cannot justify hastening death.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  21478423     Owner:  NLM     Status:  Publisher    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
The rule of double effect is regularly invoked in ethical discussions about palliative sedation, terminal extubation and other clinical acts that may be viewed as hastening death for imminently dying patients. Unfortunately, the literature tends to employ this useful principle in a fashion suggesting that it offers the final word on the moral acceptability of such medical procedures. In fact, the rule cannot be applied appropriately without invoking moral theories that are not explicit in the rule itself. Four tenets of the rule each require their own ethical justification. A variety of moral theories are relevant to making judgements in a pluralistic society. Much of the rich moral conversation germane to the rule has been reflected in arguments about physician-asssisted suicide and voluntary active euthanasia, but the rule itself has limited relevance to these debates, and requires its own moral justifications when applied to other practices that might hasten death.
Authors:
J Andrew Billings
Related Documents :
21385153 - Excuses.
21220283 - The search for life in our solar system and the implications for science and society.
20887423 - Development and implementation of guidelines in allergic rhinitis – an aria-ga2len pa...
Publication Detail:
Type:  JOURNAL ARTICLE     Date:  2011-4-8
Journal Detail:
Title:  Journal of medical ethics     Volume:  -     ISSN:  1473-4257     ISO Abbreviation:  -     Publication Date:  2011 Apr 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2011-4-11     Completed Date:  -     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  7513619     Medline TA:  J Med Ethics     Country:  -    
Other Details:
Languages:  ENG     Pagination:  -     Citation Subset:  -    
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  Patients' perspectives of the substitute decision maker: who makes better decisions?
Next Document:  Achieving online consent to participation in large-scale gene-environment studies: a tangible destin...