Politics And Policies In The Debate On Euthanasia

This book analyses the political and public debates about euthanasia in Portugal. Utilising petitions submitted to Parliament, legislative bills, parliamentary debates, opinion articles in newspapers, and documents published by the Catholic Church, it examines this sensitive issue through the theoretical lens of morality politics. It does so by studying the process of political dispute between advocacy coalitions formed by political parties and societal actors. This is the first book to comprehensively analyse a morality issue in Portugal, a predominantly Catholic country that has taken an innovative and liberal stance on many morality issues over the last two decades. It will appeal to students and scholars of sociology, political science, public policy and bioethics, as well as policymakers and other interest groups.

Whether the law should permit voluntary euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide is one of the most vital questions facing all modern societies. Internationally, the main obstacle to legalisation has proved to be the objection that, even if they were morally acceptable in certain 'hard cases', voluntary euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide could not be effectively controlled; society would slide down a 'slippery slope' to the killing of patients who did not make a free and informed request, or for whom palliative care would have offered an alternative. How cogent is this objection? This book provides the general reader (who need have no expertise in philosophy, law or medicine) with a lucid introduction to this central question in the debate, not least by reviewing the Dutch euthanasia experience. It will interest all in any country whether currently for or against legalisation, who wish to ensure that their opinions are better informed.

Drawing on extensive data including news media reports and commentaries, documentaries, courts and court reports, films, websites, professional literature and government and non-government agencies, this book explores the 'Alzheimerisation' of the euthanasia debate, examining the shift in recent years in public attitudes towards the desirability and moral permissibility of euthanasia as an end-of-life 'solution' for people living with the disease - not just at its end stage, but also at earlier stages. With attention to media representations and public understandings of Alzheimer's disease, Alzheimer's Disease, Media Representations and the Politics of Euthanasia sheds light on the processes contributing to these changes in public opinion, investigating the drivers of vexed political debate surrounding the issue and examining the manner in which both sides of the euthanasia debate mobilise support, portray their opponents and make use of media technologies to frame the terms of discourse. Paving the way for a greater level of intellectual honesty with regard to an issue carrying significant policy implications, this book will be of interest to scholars of media and communication, social movements and political communication, and the sociology of health and medicine, as well as researchers and professionals in the fields of palliative and end of life care.

Physician-Assisted Death is the eleventh volume of Biomedical Ethics Reviews. We, the editors, are pleased with the response to the series over the years and, as a result, are happy to continue into a second decade with the same general purpose and zeal. As in the past, contributors to projected volumes have been asked to summarize the nature of the literature, the prevailing attitudes and arguments, and then to advance the discussion in some way by staking out and arguing forcefully for some basic position on the topic targeted for discussion. For the present volume on Physician-Assisted Death, we felt it wise to enlist the services of a guest editor, Dr. Gregg A. Kasting, a practicing physician with extensive clinical knowledge of the various problems and issues encountered in discussing physician assisted death. Dr. Kasting is also our student and just completing a graduate degree in philosophy with a specialty in biomedical ethics here at Georgia State University. Apart from a keen interest in the topic, Dr. Kasting has published good work in the area and has, in our opinion, done an excellent job in taking on the lion's share of editing this well-balanced and probing set of essays. We hope you will agree that this volume significantly advances the level of discussion on physician-assisted euthanasia. Incidentally, we wish to note that the essays in this volume were all finished and committed to press by January 1993.

claim was that he had faced a conflict of duties pitting his legal duty not to kill against his duty as a physician to relieve his patient’s unbearable suffering. He was acquitted on the important grounds of conflict of duty. These grounds are based on a concept in Dutch law called "force majeure" 4 which recognizes extenuating circumstances such as conflicts of duty. The acquittal was upheld by the Lower Court of Alkmaar, but revoked by an Amsterdam court of appeal. The case went on to the Supreme Court, but before the Supreme Court's decision was issued, the Royal Dutch Medical Association (RDMA) attempted to clarify the criteria for euthanasia that many within the profession already accepted. The RDMA proposed that physicians be permitted to perform euthanasia provided that a set of procedures had been met. Variously stated, the guidelines contain the following central provisions: Voluntary, competent, explicit, and persistent requests on the part of the • patient; Requests based on full information; • The patient is in a situation of intolerable and hopeless suffering (either • physical or mental); No further acceptable alternatives to euthanasia. All alternatives • acceptable to the patient for relief of suffering having been tried; Consultation with at least one other physician whose judgment can be • 5 expected to be independent. Indirectly, these guidelines became the criteria prosecutors used to decide whether or not to bring charges.

This revealing volume explores recent historical perspectives on the modern euthanasia and assisted-suicide debate and the political arenas in which it has unfolded. Emotional public responses to widely publicized right-to-die and euthanasia cases, such as those revolving around Dr. Jack Kevorkian and Terri Schiavo, highlight their volatile mix of medical, ethical, religious, legal, and public policy issues. The Euthanasia/Assisted-Suicide Debate explores how this debate has evolved over the past 100 years as judicial approaches, legislative responses, and prosecutorial practices have shifted as a result of changes in medical technology and consumer sophistication. Emphasizing the period from the 1950s forward, the book offers an unbiased examination of the origins of the modern medical euthanasia and assisted-suicide debates, the involvement of physicians, the history and significance of medical technology and practice, and the role of patients and their families in the ongoing controversy. This illuminating exploration of concepts, issues, and players will help readers understand both sides of the debate as viewed by participants.

In this new addition to the 'Debating Law' series, Emily Jackson and John Keown re-examine the legal and ethical aspects of the euthanasia debate. Emily Jackson argues that we owe it to everyone in society to do all that we can to ensure that they experience a 'good death'. For a small minority of patients who experience intolerable and unrelievable suffering, this may mean helping them to have an assisted death. In a liberal society, where people's moral views differ, we should not force individuals to experience deaths they find intolerable. This is not an argument in favour of dying. On the contrary, Jackson argues that legalisation could extend and enhance the lives of people whose present fear of the dying process causes them overwhelming distress. John Keown argues that voluntary euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are gravely unethical and he defends their continued prohibition by law. He analyses the main arguments for relaxation of the law - including those which invoke the experience of jurisdictions which permit these practices - and finds them wanting. Relaxing the law would, he concludes, be both wrong in principle and dangerous in practice, not least for the dying, the disabled and the disadvantaged.

In 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada struck down criminal laws prohibiting medical assistance in dying (MAID) in its Carter v Canada ruling. Assisted Suicide in Canada delves into the moral and policy dimensions of this case, summarizing other key rulings and subsequent legislation. Travis Dumsday explores thorny topics such as freedom of conscience for healthcare professionals, public funding for MAID, and extensions of eligibility. Carter v Canada will alter Canadians’ understanding of life, death, and the practice of medicine for generations. This nuanced work will help readers think through the legal, ethical, and policy issues surrounding assisted dying.