| Is there a logical slippery slope from voluntary to nonvoluntary euthanasia? | |
| | |
MedLine Citation:
|
PMID: 22187931 Owner: NLM Status: In-Process |
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
|
John Keown has constructed a logical slippery slope argument from voluntary euthanasia (VAE) to nonvoluntary euthanasia (NVAE). VAE if justified implies that death can be of overall benefit, in which case it should also be facilitated in those who cannot consent (NVAE). Hallvard Lillehammer asserts that Keown's argument rests on a fallacy. However, pace Lillehammer, it can be restated to escape this fallacy. Its validity is confirmed by applying to VAE some well-established general principles of medical decision making. Thus, either VAE and NVAE must be accepted together or, if NVAE is regarded as unacceptable, VAE should also be rejected. |
| | |
Authors:
|
David Albert Jones |
Publication Detail:
|
Type: Journal Article |
Journal Detail:
|
Title: Kennedy Institute of Ethics journal Volume: 21 ISSN: 1054-6863 ISO Abbreviation: Kennedy Inst Ethics J Publication Date: 2011 Dec |
Date Detail:
|
Created Date: 2011-12-22 Completed Date: - Revised Date: - |
Medline Journal Info:
|
Nlm Unique ID: 9109135 Medline TA: Kennedy Inst Ethics J Country: United States |
Other Details:
|
Languages: eng Pagination: 379-404 Citation Subset: E; IM |
Affiliation:
|
Anscombe Bioethics Centre, Oxford, UK. |
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: Respect for other selves.
Next Document: Cost Effectiveness of Rivaroxaban versus Enoxaparin for Prevention of Post-Surgical Venous Thromboem...