Support for Voluntary Euthanasia with No Logical Slippery Slope to Non-Voluntary Euthanasia

Area of Science:

• Medical Ethics
• Bioethics
• Public Health Policy

Background:

• The 'slippery slope' argument posits that legalizing voluntary euthanasia may inevitably lead to non-voluntary euthanasia or euthanasia on request.
• Philosophical and ethical debates surrounding end-of-life decisions often invoke concerns about potential abuses and unintended consequences of euthanasia laws.

Purpose of the Study:

• To critically analyze and refute the slippery slope arguments presented by John Keown and David Jones regarding voluntary euthanasia.
• To propose and defend two distinct models for understanding and justifying voluntary euthanasia that avoid the purported slippery slope.
• To offer recommendations for the design of euthanasia legislation based on the proposed models.

Main Methods:

• Analysis of philosophical arguments concerning voluntary euthanasia, specifically the slippery slope claims of Keown and Jones.
• Development of two conceptual frameworks for voluntary euthanasia, focusing on patient autonomy and evidence of well-being from patient requests.
• Comparative analysis of proposed models with existing euthanasia legislation in Oregon and the Netherlands.

Main Results:

• Demonstrates that acceptance of voluntary euthanasia does not necessitate commitment to non-voluntary euthanasia or euthanasia on request.
• Rejects the notion that voluntary euthanasia requires physicians to deem patients 'better off dead,' proposing instead 'appropriate deference' to patient judgment.
• Both proposed models for voluntary euthanasia successfully circumvent slippery slope concerns and are supported by analogies to established medical practices.

Conclusions:

• Voluntary euthanasia can be ethically grounded in patient autonomy and evidence of well-being without triggering a slide into non-voluntary practices.
• The findings provide a basis for designing euthanasia legislation that balances patient rights with safeguards against potential abuses.
• Existing laws in Oregon and the Netherlands may require adjustments to align with a more robust ethical framework for voluntary euthanasia.