euthanasia extra reading 0.0 / 5 ? Lawbiomedical lawUniversityNone Created by: leahjayne97Created on: 08-05-19 16:20 Herring doctrine of double effect allows leathal dosage of pain killing drugs 1 of 40 Herring competent adults have the right to refuse life sustaining treatment 2 of 40 Herring all behind the veil of ignorance when it comes to death 3 of 40 Herring principle of patient autonomy is dominant in medical law 4 of 40 Herring cannot distinguish between murder for malicious reasons and murder for familial love 5 of 40 Herring no doctor has ever been convicted of murder for carrying out euthanasia at the request of the patient 6 of 40 Herring r v moor irony that doctor who takes time to tend to dying patient ends up on this charge 7 of 40 Herring r v cox despite conviction still allowed to practice 8 of 40 Herring creating a defense of necessity would legalise euthanasia 9 of 40 Herring it is not for the courts to decide whether euthanasia laws require change 10 of 40 Herring is it in the public interest to prosecute 11 of 40 Herring no convictions of those who have helped others to dignitas 12 of 40 Herring some specialists say there is no way proepr pain management would end in death 13 of 40 Herring ann morris says it is condoning unlawful behaviour 14 of 40 Herring lord mustill says a doctor has no right to proceed in the face of objection 15 of 40 Herring not clear if one can commit suicide through ommisions 16 of 40 Herring john keown when does right to choose lose meaning 17 of 40 Herring arguments of compassion 18 of 40 Herring james rachels argues the process of being allowed to die is relatively slow and painful 19 of 40 Herring why criminalise behaviour which is then ignored 20 of 40 Herring leglaisation would allow it to be more closely regulated 21 of 40 Herring contravenes idea that all human life is intrinsically valuable 22 of 40 Herring religious ideas that life is not ours to end 23 of 40 Herring palliative care cannot alleviate feelings of loss of dignity and diminished autonomy 24 of 40 Herring accepting euthanasia in certain circumstances makes retaining absolute prohibition disingenuous 25 of 40 Herring depression should not be reason for request 26 of 40 Herring finality of euthanasia no room for human error 27 of 40 Herring risk of abuse pressure put on people 28 of 40 Herring profound implications on doctor responsibilities and patient relationships 29 of 40 Herring slippery slope step away from euthanasia programmes 30 of 40 is there a right to die australias northern territory passed first legislation in 1996 overturned in a year 31 of 40 is there a right to die most jurisdictions consider actions which hasten death to be manslaughter or homicide regardless of motive 32 of 40 is there a right to die 1995 dutch doctors granted immunity from prosecuted for assisting in suicides so long as adhered to proscribed protocol 33 of 40 is there a right to die 2000 exempt from euthanasia and physician assisted suicide 34 of 40 is there a right to die oregon law death with dignity act 1997 35 of 40 is there a right to die 1990 us supreme court held states have a right to ban regulate and legalise who is allowed to make life concerning decisions 36 of 40 is there a right to die government and politics play a big role in determining the legality of euthanasia 37 of 40 is there a right to die the right to die is an extremely controversial issue where politicians and law and religion collide 38 of 40 is there a right to die religious influence many emphasise the importance of preservation of life 39 of 40 is there a right to die arguments of a slippery slope leading to a siminal situation of cleansing such as nazi regime 40 of 40
Comments
No comments have yet been made