Abortion And Euthanasia

Internationally renowned lawyer and philosopher Ronald Dworkin addresses the crucially related acts of abortion and euthanasia in a brilliantly original book that examines their meaning in a nation that prizes both life and individual liberty. From Roe v. Wade to the legal battle over the death of Nancy Cruzan, no issues have opened greater rifts in American society than those of abortion and euthanasia. At the heart of Life's Dominion is Dworkin's inquest into why abortion and euthanasia provoke such controversy. Do these acts violate some fundamental "right to life"? Or are the objections against them based on the belief that human life is sacred? Combining incisive moral reasoning and close readings of indicidual court decisions with a majestic interpretation of the U.S. Constitution itself, Dworkin gives us a work that is absolutely essential for anyone who cares about the legal status of human life.

This book considers how the termination of life might be accepted in the view of a general obligation to protect life. It features more than 10 papers written by scholars from 14 countries that offer international comparative empirical research. Inside, readers will find case studies from such areas as: India, Chile, Germany, Italy, England, Palestine, Lithuania, Nigeria, and Poland. The papers focus on three limitations of the right to life: the death penalty, abortion, and euthanasia. The contributors explore how young people understand and evaluate the right to life and its limitations. The book presents unique empirical research among today's youth and reveals that, among other concepts, religiosity matters. It provides insight into the acceptance, perception, and legitimation of human rights by people from different religious and cultural backgrounds. This investigation rigorously tests for inter-individual differences regarding political and judicial rights on religious grounds, while controlling for other characteristics. It will help readers better understand the many facets of this fundamental, yet controversial, philosophical question. The volume will be of interest to students, researchers, as well as general readers searching for answers.

This book presents an atheistic case against the legalization of assisted suicide. Critical of both sides of the argument, it questions the assumptions behind the discussion. Yuill shows that our attitudes towards suicide – not euthanasia – are most important to our attitudes towards assisted suicide.

A pioneering work on controversial issues within the Muslim world Islamic Ethics of Life considers three of the most contentious ethical issues of our time--abortion, war, and euthanasia--from the Muslim perspective. Distinguished scholars of Islamic studies have collaborated to produce a volume that both integrates Muslim thinking into the field of applied ethics and introduces readers to an aspect of the religion long overlooked in the West. This collective effort sets forth the relationship between Islamic ethics and law, clearly revealing the complexity and richness of the Islamic tradition as well as its responsiveness to these controversial modern issues. The contributors analyze classical sources and survey the modern ethical landscape to identify guiding principles within Islamic ethical thought. Clarifying the importance of pragmatism in Islamic decision making, the contributors also offer case studies related to specialized topics, including "wrongful birth" claims, terrorist attacks, and brain death. The case studies elicit possible variations on common Muslim perspectives. The contributors situate Muslim ethics relative to Christian and secular accounts of the value of human life, exposing surprising similarities and differences. In an introductory overview of the volume, Jonathan E. Brockopp underscores the steady focus on God as the one who determines the value of human life, and hence as the final arbiter of Islamic ethics. A foreword by Gene Outka places the volume in the context of general ethical studies, and an afterword by A. Kevin Reinhart suggests some significant ramifications for comparative religious ethics.

After assessing the strengths and weaknesses of arguments for assisted suicide and euthanasia, Gorsuch builds a nuanced, novel, and powerful moral and legal argument against legalization, one based on a principle that, surprisingly, has largely been overlooked in the debate; the idea that human life is intrinsically valuable and that intentional killing is always wrong. At the same time, the argument Gorsuch develops leaves wide latitude for individual patient autonomy and the refusal of unwanted medical treatment and life-sustaining care, permitting intervention only in cases where an intention to kill is present.

This guide answers the most perplexing questions of our time. Briefly and accurately the authors present the medical, philosophical, and legal evidence. They also provide the texts of major court decisions, a "living will" form, and statements on the beginning of life and the ethics of civil disobedience.

The idea of reviewing the ethical concerns of ancient medicine with an eye as to how they might instruct us about the extremely lively disputes of our own contemporary medicine is such a natural one that it surprises us to real ize how very slow we have been to pursue it in a sustained way_ Ideologues have often seized on the very name of Hippocrates to close off debate about such matters as abortion and euthanasia - as if by appeal to a well-known and sacred authority that no informed person would care or dare to oppose_ And yet, beneath the polite fakery of such reference, we have deprived our selves of a familiarity with the genuinely 'unsimple' variety of Greek and Roman reflections on the great questions of medical ethics. The fascination of recovering those views surely depends on one stunning truism at least: humans sicken and die; they must be cared for by those who are socially endorsed to specialize in the task; and the changes in the rounds of human life are so much the same from ancient times to our own that the disputes and agreements of the past are remarkably similar to those of our own.