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

Is there a right to die?

L R Kass1

  • 1University of Chicago.

The Hastings Center Report
|January 1, 1993
PubMed
Summary

There is no sound philosophical or legal basis for a "right to die." This conclusion challenges personal decision-making and public policy regarding medically managed death.

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

Triumph or tragedy? The moral meaning of genetic technology.

The American journal of jurisprudence·2006
Same author

Why we should ban the cloning of human beings.

Texas review of law & politics·2005
Same author

The wisdom of repugnance: why we should ban the cloning of humans.

Valparaiso University law review. Valparaiso University. School of Law·2003
Same author

Ban stand: cloning's big test.

New republic (New York, N.Y.)·2002
Same author

L'Chaim and its limits: why not immortality?

First things (New York, N.Y.)·2002
Same author

Preventing a brave new world: why we should ban human cloning now.

New republic (New York, N.Y.)·2002

Area of Science:

  • Bioethics
  • Medical Law
  • Public Policy

Background:

  • The concept of medically managed death involves complex ethical and legal considerations.
  • Discussions surrounding end-of-life choices often invoke notions of individual autonomy and rights.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To critically examine the philosophical and legal underpinnings of a
  • right to die
  • in the context of medically managed death.
  • To evaluate the suitability of rights-based arguments for personal decision-making and public policy in this sensitive area.

Main Methods:

  • Philosophical analysis of ethical frameworks related to autonomy and suffering.
  • Legal scholarship review of relevant case law and statutory provisions.
  • Policy analysis of the implications of recognizing a right to medically managed death.

Main Results:

  • The study finds no robust philosophical arguments supporting a
  • right to die
  • based on established ethical principles.
  • Legal analysis reveals a lack of firm legal precedent or consensus to establish such a right.
  • The application of rights discourse to medically managed death is deemed ill-suited for both individual decision-making and policy development.

Conclusions:

  • The discourse of rights is inappropriate and unhelpful when discussing medically managed death.
  • A rights-based framework does not adequately address the complexities of personal choice and public policy in end-of-life care.
  • Alternative frameworks are needed to guide decision-making and policy in this ethically charged domain.
Keywords:
Analytical ApproachDeath and EuthanasiaPhilosophical Approach

Related Experiment Videos