Finding a way through the ethical and legal maze : withdrawing medical treatment and euthanasia
McGee, Andrew (2005) Finding a way through the ethical and legal maze : withdrawing medical treatment and euthanasia. Medical Law Review, 13(3), pp. 357-385.
This is the latest version of this eprint.
Abstract
This article examines Finnis' and Keown's claim that the intention/foresight distinction should be used as the basis for the lawfulness of withholding and withdrawing medical treatment, rather than the act/omission distinction which is currently used. I argue that whilst the intention/foresight distinction is sound and can apply to palliative pain relief hastening death, it cannot be applied to withholding and withdrawing medical treatment. Instead, the act/omission distinction remains the better basis for the lawfulness of withholding and withdrawal, and law reform is consequently unnecessary.
Citations:
Citation countsare sourced monthly from Scopus and Web of Science citation databases.
These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science generally from 1980 onwards.
Citations counts from the Google Scholar™ indexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.
| ID Code: | 38166 |
|---|---|
| Item Type: | Journal Article |
| Keywords: | Withholding and withdrawing life prolonging treatment, euthanasia, intention, foresight, act, omission, sanctity of life |
| DOI: | 10.1093/medlaw/fwi023 |
| ISSN: | 0967-0742 |
| Subjects: | Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > LAW AND LEGAL STUDIES (180000) > LAW (180100) > Criminal Law and Procedure (180110) Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > LAW AND LEGAL STUDIES (180000) > LAW (180100) > Law not elsewhere classified (180199) Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGIOUS STUDIES (220000) > APPLIED ETHICS (220100) Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > PHILOSOPHY AND RELIGIOUS STUDIES (220000) > PHILOSOPHY (220300) > Ethical Theory (220305) |
| Divisions: | Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > Faculty of Law Current > Schools > School of Law |
| Deposited On: | 26 Oct 2010 11:51 |
| Last Modified: | 01 Mar 2012 00:21 |
Available Versions of this Item
- Finding a way through the ethical and legal maze : withdrawing medical treatment and euthanasia. (deposited 06 Oct 2010 12:38)
- Finding a way through the ethical and legal maze : withdrawing medical treatment and euthanasia. (deposited 26 Oct 2010 11:51)[Currently Displayed]
Export: EndNote | Dublin Core | BibTeX
Repository Staff Only: item control page