Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Two challenges to the double effect doctrine: euthanasia and abortion.

A B Shaw1

  • 1ab.nr.shaw@talk21.com

Journal of Medical Ethics
|April 6, 2002
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Hazara nairovirus elicits differential induction of apoptosis and nucleocapsid protein cleavage in mammalian and tick cells.

The Journal of general virology·2019
Same author

Depressive illness delayed Hamlet's revenge.

Medical humanities·2013
Same author

A historical exhibition from the norfolk and norwich hospital.

Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine·2010
Same author

Long-term preservation of strains of Burkholderia cepacia, Pseudomonas spp. and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia isolated from patients with cystic fibrosis.

Letters in applied microbiology·2001
Same author

Intuitions, principles and consequences.

Journal of medical ethics·2001
Same author

Age as a basis for healthcare rationing. Support for agist policies.

Drugs & aging·1996

The double effect doctrine, often used in medical ethics, is argued to be invalid for euthanasia and abortion. This ethical principle struggles with direct vs. indirect killing in end-of-life care and fetal termination.

Area of Science:

  • Medical Ethics
  • Bioethics
  • Philosophy of Medicine

Background:

  • The doctrine of double effect is a principle used to evaluate the permissibility of actions that have both good and bad consequences.
  • Its application in complex medical scenarios like euthanasia and abortion remains a subject of ethical debate.
  • Understanding the ethical framework governing end-of-life care and reproductive choices is crucial.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To critically examine the validity and applicability of the doctrine of double effect in the contexts of euthanasia and abortion.
  • To analyze the ethical implications of direct versus indirect killing in medical treatment.
  • To explore the moral distinctions, or lack thereof, between different types of killing in medical practice.

Main Methods:

Keywords:
Analytical ApproachDeath and EuthanasiaGenetics and Reproduction

Related Experiment Videos

  • Philosophical analysis of the doctrine of double effect.
  • Ethical argumentation regarding the moral permissibility of actions in euthanasia and abortion.
  • Comparison of direct and indirect killing in medical contexts.

    • Main Results:

    • The doctrine of double effect is found to be inapplicable to the care of the dying, as medical professionals are often obligated to cause harm to achieve a good outcome.
    • Patients' autonomy in making value judgments about mutilation or death is emphasized.
    • The moral distinction between direct and indirect killing in abortion yields counterintuitive results.
    • Killing fetuses as a means of treatment or as an inevitable side effect in abortion challenges the doctrine's coherence.

    Conclusions:

    • The doctrine of double effect does not adequately address the complexities of euthanasia and abortion.
    • Pragmatic rules, rather than strict ethical doctrines, appear to govern practices surrounding euthanasia, leading to greater restrictions compared to abortion.
    • A re-evaluation of ethical frameworks for end-of-life care and reproductive medicine is warranted.