Prohibition Of Euthanasia Research Articles

Death Wishes, Aging Patients, and Euthanasia

The authors are searchers in psychopathology and communicate here about the dead wishes in relation to euthanasia. In Europe, the question comes regularly up to know if the law should be changed concerning the prohibition of euthanasia. The health system obeys progressively a modern idea of comfort and the “good life”. The authors are psychotherapists and their methodology is based mainly on phenomenological psychology, psychoanalysis, and psychopathology. Statistics of the French Ministry of Health will support their statements. Different clinical experiences with young patients, aging patients, or near-to-death patients are crossed and compared to those marked by heavy experiences like rape or amputation. The unbearable nature of their suffering makes them ask frequently to stop the pain. They would prefer being dead. This contribution examinates this kind of demand to find a helpful position for the caregiver and the patient. We should consider that near-death patients may often be at the climax of anxiety and depression is likely to switch over to dementia. In asking to finish with life, this purpose may change one day to another – sometimes it just highlights the wish to see things changed. The position of society and the medical staff has a high influence as well. Asking for euthanasia shows the variety of the same words that have different meanings from a medical, psychological, or psychopathological viewpoint. The purpose is to consider these aspects with the patient’s demand.

القتل الرحيم دراسة مقارنة بين القانون الوضعي والتشريع الإلهي Euthanasia: A Comparative Study between Positive Law and Divine Legislation

This study aimed to identify the provisions of euthanasia in positive law and divine legislation, and also aimed to identify the provisions of positive or negative euthanasia, both legally and religiously, the study used the analytical method, and the comparative method, The study reached a number of results, most notably, the convergence of comparative legislation on euthanasia, some of which permitted it, especially Western legislation, and some of it criminalized, especially Islamic legislation. Whether positive or negative, they considered it a crime of intentional killing, just as the three monotheistic religions unanimously agreed on the prohibition of euthanasia and considered it a crime of unlawfully killing a human being, The jurists unanimously agreed on the prohibition of positive euthanasia, just as the jurists differed on the prohibition of passive euthanasia.

القتل الرحيم دراسة مقارنة بين القانون الوضعي والتشريع الإلهي Euthanasia: A Comparative Study between Positive Law and Divine Legislation

This study aimed to identify the provisions of euthanasia in positive law and divine legislation, and also aimed to identify the provisions of positive or negative euthanasia, both legally and religiously, the study used the analytical method, and the comparative method, The study reached a number of results, most notably, the convergence of comparative legislation on euthanasia, some of which permitted it, especially Western legislation, and some of it criminalized, especially Islamic legislation. Whether positive or negative, they considered it a crime of intentional killing, just as the three monotheistic religions unanimously agreed on the prohibition of euthanasia and considered it a crime of unlawfully killing a human being, The jurists unanimously agreed on the prohibition of positive euthanasia, just as the jurists differed on the prohibition of passive euthanasia.

Voluntary assisted dying and euthanasia’s perpetual pendulum in Australia

Abstract This paper delves into the intricate relationship between euthanasia and the perpetual pendulum concept, which challenges conventional linear understandings of time and legal principles. Examining euthanasia through the perpetual pendulum concept, inspired by Deleuze and Guattari’s rhizome theory, underscores that the acceptance or prohibition of euthanasia is deeply intertwined with evolving societal values and conceptual frameworks. It advocates for adaptable legal interpretations and an acknowledgment of the relative nature of time, allowing for the reevaluation and reinterpretation of legal principles in response to changing perspectives. The legal landscape of euthanasia in Australia, with varying state laws and potential conflicts with federal statutes, serves as a compelling case study. It emphasizes the ongoing need for discussion, adaptation, and ethical introspection to balance individual autonomy with broader legal and ethical considerations in the context of end-of-life care.

Prohibition of euthanasia as a duty to live

In this article, we consider the problem of euthanasia as a form of realization of the human right to die. The historical aspects of euthanasia are discussed along with its legal aspects. Thus, modern Russian legislation bans implementation of euthanasia by medical workers under the threat of criminal punishment. An analysis of government policies on human euthanasia was conducted, including in countries where this procedure is legalized. The results show that euthanasia is applied within strict limits, in accordance with the established order. Euthanasia was found to have no effect on mortality and suicide tendencies. In addition, the authors propose an approach to the multi-stage practical implementation of euthanasia, which is carried out by independent and disinterested specialists. At each stage, a large number of interrelated procedures is performed, each of which confirms the validity of the previous step. The patient must make a voluntary euthanasia decision based on comprehensive information about his or her health. In turn, the government should provide an alternative to euthanasia in the form of palliative care. In conclusion, the need to enshrine the principles, conditions, and mechanisms of euthanasia in Russian legislation is substantiated, which would ensure the human right to die with dignity.

An Argument in Defense of Voluntary Euthanasia

One of the most challenging issues in medical ethics is a permission or prohibition of euthanasia. Is a patient with an incurable disease who has lots of pain permitted to kill oneself or ask others to do that? The main reason advanced by the opponents is the absolute prohibition of murder. Accordingly, the meaning of murder plays a key role in determining the moral judgment of euthanasia. The aim of this paper is to confirm the role of intention in moral judgment of euthanasia and eliminate the name of unjust murder from voluntary euthanasia. The Intention of an agent determines the name of the act and whether it is right or wrong. An important point that dose not taken into account in the definitions of murder, killing as well as their ethical judgment is considering the attributes of being unjust and forcible. Killing a human being is neither intrinsically good nor bad, but its ethical judgment depends on the way that happens, i.e. just or unjust. Every killing is neither bad nor unethical except unjust one which is both bad and unethical. The attribute of “unjust” has been mentioned in the definition of murder in Islamic jurisprudence, law, traditions, and Quran. Owing to this argument, on one hand, it is true to state that voluntary euthanasia is not unjust and forcible murder (the test of correct negation), and on the other hand, it is not true to say that voluntary euthanasia is unjust and forcible murder (the test of incorrect predication). It can be concluded that voluntary euthanasia is an independent title other than unjust murder and does not have its judgment.

“The prohibition of euthanasia” and medical oaths of Hippocratic Stemma

It has been debated whether the Hippocratic Oath’s commitment referring to not administering poisonous/ deadly drugs prohibits: euthanasia, assisted suicide or murder. The first goal was to analyze if the prohibition of administering poisonous/deadly drugs was kept and how it changed in medical oaths of Hippocratic stemma of different time periods and religious orientations. The second aim was discern what is forbidden: euthanasia, assisted suicide or murder. Seventeen medical oaths: 4 Medieval, 2 Modern and 11 Contemporary oaths were studied and divided into those expressing the commitment like the original, those that may include it depending on the interpretation and those that do not mention it. Medieval and Modern oaths express it similarly to the Hippocratic Oath, possibly due to religious and Hippocratic/Galenic influences. What they forbid cannot be inferred. Contemporary oaths maintaining the commitment tend to include phrases regarding active euthanasia and assisted suicide. Other contemporary oaths may generalize it. . It would be advisable that medical oaths would contain clear and specific premises regarding this commitment depending on the country, school and the student body’s idiosyncrasies.

Dilemmas in a Patient Who asks to Die

The act of dying is a constant in the medical world and doctors rarely pose comments or participate in discussions related to this topic. And this is certainly uncommon, because both the debated issue of euthanasia as the assisted suicide are, first, issues that concern directly to the doctor. Perhaps doctors do not have to say, because the point is clear. There is, first, a clear legal prohibition of euthanasia, which is considered a crime. On the other hand, there is a clear ethical and deontological prohibition on these issues. Now, although doctors do not deepen into these debates, it does not mean that these issues do not generate medical dilemmas and problems and even a doctor may be in favors of such practices. In this article, we will try to reflect on these issues and we will try to ponder on the always controversial euthanasia.

Fin de vie en médecine néonatale à la lumière de la loi

Two recent laws have significantly reformed the French Public Health Code: the law of March 4th 2002, related to the patient's rights and the quality of the health care system and the law of April 22nd 2005, related to the patient's rights and the end of life. These changes have prompted health care professionals involved in perinatal and neonatal medicine to update their considerations on the ethical aspects of the end of life in neonatal medicine. Therefore, the authors examined the clauses of the law related to the patient's rights and to the end of life, confronting them with the distinctive features of neonatal medicine. In this paper, the medical practices, which are either prohibited or authorized in the course of end of life are considered: prohibition of euthanasia, authorization for alleviating pain at the risk of shortening life, authorization for restricting, withholding or withdrawing treatments. Next, the justifications provided by the legislation to authorize these practices are analysed: prohibition of unreasonable obstinacy and respect for individual wishes. Then, the conditions required by the law to determine and to implement these acts are discussed: consultation with the healthcare staff and justified advice from a consulting physician, consideration of parental opinion, registration of the decision and its justifications into the patient's medical file, protection of the dying patient's dignity and preservation of his life quality by providing palliative care. Lastly, we report the terms of the ethical dilemma which may occur in the area of neonatal medicine in spite of genuine and persevering efforts in order to conciliate legal requirement and ethical responsibility.