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

Against euthanasia for children: a response to Bovens.

Christopher Kaczor

    Journal of Medical Ethics
    |October 18, 2015
    PubMed
    Summary

    This paper examines the ethical arguments surrounding voluntary euthanasia for children. It refutes objections to child euthanasia and discusses the responsibilities of advocates and opponents in promoting palliative care.

    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

    Ectogenesis and a right to the death of the prenatal human being: A reply to Räsänen.

    Bioethics·2018
    Same author

    Should Pediatric Euthanasia be Legalized?

    Pediatrics·2018
    Same author

    A dubious defense of 'after-birth abortion': A reply to Räsänen.

    Bioethics·2017
    Same author

    Would artificial wombs produce more harm than good?

    The national Catholic bioethics quarterly·2006
    Same author

    Could artificial wombs end the abortion debate?

    The national Catholic bioethics quarterly·2005
    Same author

    The tragic case of Jodie and Mary: questions about separating conjoined twins.

    The Linacre quarterly·2003

    Area of Science:

    • Bioethics
    • Pediatric Ethics
    • Medical Law

    Background:

    • The debate on voluntary euthanasia for adults raises questions about its applicability to minors.
    • Luc Bovens argues affirmatively for extending euthanasia to children, addressing common objections.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To provide a critical rejoinder to Bovens' arguments against objections to child euthanasia.
    • To analyze the distribution of responsibility for promoting palliative care between euthanasia advocates and opponents.

    Main Methods:

    • Philosophical analysis of ethical arguments.
    • Rebuttal of existing arguments concerning child euthanasia.
    • Critique of the ethical obligations regarding palliative care.

    Main Results:

    • All five arguments against child euthanasia (weightiness, discernment, pressure, sensitivity, palliative care) are critically examined and rebutted.
    • The paper challenges Bovens' assertion that opponents of euthanasia bear an extra responsibility for palliative care.

    Conclusions:

    • Advocates for legalized euthanasia have a distinct obligation to advance palliative care.
    • The ethical considerations for voluntary euthanasia in minors require thorough examination and debate.
    Keywords:
    ChildrenEuthanasiaInformed ConsentPalliative Care

    Related Experiment Videos