当前位置:
X-MOL 学术
›
Ratio Juris
›
论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
The Medical Exception to the Prohibition of Killing: A Matter of the Right Intention?
Ratio Juris Pub Date : 2019-05-29 , DOI: 10.1111/raju.12239 Govert Den Hartogh 1
Ratio Juris Pub Date : 2019-05-29 , DOI: 10.1111/raju.12239 Govert Den Hartogh 1
Affiliation
It has long been thought that by using morphine to alleviate the pain of a dying patient, a doctor runs the risk of causing his death. In all countries this kind of killing is explicitly or silently permitted by the law. That permission is usually explained by appealing to the doctrine of double effect: If the use of morphine shortens life, that is only an unintended side effect. The paper evaluates this view, finding it flawed beyond repair and proposing an alternative explanation. It is not the intention of the doctor that counts, but the availability of an “objective” palliative justification.
中文翻译:
禁止杀人的医疗例外:正确意图的事吗?
长期以来,人们一直认为通过使用吗啡减轻垂死患者的痛苦,医生会冒着导致其死亡的风险。在所有国家/地区,法律都明确或默示地禁止此类杀戮。通常通过诉诸双重效应学说来解释这种许可:如果使用吗啡会缩短寿命,那只是意想不到的副作用。本文对这种观点进行了评估,发现它存在无法修复的缺陷,并提出了另一种解释。重要的不是医生的意图,而是“客观”姑息治疗的依据。
更新日期:2019-05-29
中文翻译:
禁止杀人的医疗例外:正确意图的事吗?
长期以来,人们一直认为通过使用吗啡减轻垂死患者的痛苦,医生会冒着导致其死亡的风险。在所有国家/地区,法律都明确或默示地禁止此类杀戮。通常通过诉诸双重效应学说来解释这种许可:如果使用吗啡会缩短寿命,那只是意想不到的副作用。本文对这种观点进行了评估,发现它存在无法修复的缺陷,并提出了另一种解释。重要的不是医生的意图,而是“客观”姑息治疗的依据。