[The concept of natural death today, between futility and ethical necessity. A concept for the 21st century].

IF 0.3 Q4 ETHICS Cuadernos de Bioetica Pub Date : 2022-09-01 DOI:10.30444/CB.134
M Carmen Massé García
{"title":"[The concept of natural death today, between futility and ethical necessity. A concept for the 21st century].","authors":"M Carmen Massé García","doi":"10.30444/CB.134","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The concept of natural death has been present in philosophical, medical and social reflection for centuries, fulfilling a double function: understanding human finitude and hoping for a desirable way to reach the end of our days. Today, those goals have been blurred by the sense of control over death that comes from the high technology of medicine, the dreams of immortality nurtured by the media, and the confusing line drawn between autonomy and dignity. This article studies the concept of natural death that in the past 20th century was the subject of debate between health workers and bioethicists and that at the beginning of this 21st century has already begun to be questioned. The ″naturalness″ of death was intended to be a kind of ethical frontier in the face of any form of violence, injustice, excessive technicalization or interference with the human will. Today, many of these aspects are blurred in a context as unnatural as he hospital one. In addition, the forensic field has also encountered serious difficulties in excluding any human, voluntary or involuntary intervention, in a large part of the deaths, since there is little natural in what we breathe, eat or drink. Based on all this, a redefinition proposal is offered that responds to a double need: the social need to integrate the inevitable mortality and the shared personal need to reach the end after a humanizing process that excludes all human responsibility. It is anthropologically possible and ethically desirable natural death.</p>","PeriodicalId":42510,"journal":{"name":"Cuadernos de Bioetica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cuadernos de Bioetica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30444/CB.134","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The concept of natural death has been present in philosophical, medical and social reflection for centuries, fulfilling a double function: understanding human finitude and hoping for a desirable way to reach the end of our days. Today, those goals have been blurred by the sense of control over death that comes from the high technology of medicine, the dreams of immortality nurtured by the media, and the confusing line drawn between autonomy and dignity. This article studies the concept of natural death that in the past 20th century was the subject of debate between health workers and bioethicists and that at the beginning of this 21st century has already begun to be questioned. The ″naturalness″ of death was intended to be a kind of ethical frontier in the face of any form of violence, injustice, excessive technicalization or interference with the human will. Today, many of these aspects are blurred in a context as unnatural as he hospital one. In addition, the forensic field has also encountered serious difficulties in excluding any human, voluntary or involuntary intervention, in a large part of the deaths, since there is little natural in what we breathe, eat or drink. Based on all this, a redefinition proposal is offered that responds to a double need: the social need to integrate the inevitable mortality and the shared personal need to reach the end after a humanizing process that excludes all human responsibility. It is anthropologically possible and ethically desirable natural death.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
今天自然死亡的概念,在无用和道德必要性之间。21世纪的概念]。
几个世纪以来,自然死亡的概念一直存在于哲学、医学和社会反思中,实现了双重功能:理解人类的有限性,并希望以一种可取的方式结束我们的生命。今天,这些目标已经被来自医学高科技的对死亡的控制感、媒体培育的长生不朽的梦想以及自主与尊严之间模糊的界限所模糊。本文研究了自然死亡的概念,在过去的20世纪是卫生工作者和生物伦理学家之间争论的主题,在21世纪初已经开始受到质疑。死亡的″自然性″意在成为面对任何形式的暴力、不公正、过度技术化或对人类意志的干涉时的一种伦理边界。今天,在一个和医院一样不自然的背景下,这些方面中的许多都是模糊的。此外,法医领域在排除大部分死亡的人为、自愿或非自愿干预方面也遇到了严重困难,因为我们呼吸、吃或喝的东西很少是自然的。在此基础上,提出了一种重新定义的建议,以回应双重需求:整合不可避免的死亡的社会需求和在排除所有人类责任的人性化过程之后达到终点的共同个人需求。自然死亡在人类学上是可能的,在伦理学上也是可取的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
20.00%
发文量
5
期刊介绍: La revista Cuadernos de Bioética, órgano oficial de la Asociación Española de Bioética y Ética Médica, publica cuatrimestralmente artículos y recensiones bibliográficas sobre todas las áreas de la bioética: fundamentación, ética de la investigación, bioética clínica, biojurídica, etc. Estos proceden de los aceptados en la revisión tutelada por los editores de la revista como de otros que por encargo el comité editorial solicite a sus autores. La edicion de la revista se financia con las aportaciones de los socios de AEBI.
期刊最新文献
[Bioethical issues of Covid-19 in Spain. A systematic review]. [Ethical and legal implications of digital mental health applications]. [Human reason versus arrogance technoscience and the replacement shadow. -Ethical evaluation and social control to regain power on the means and ends from the work of José Sanmartín]. [Response to: ″An egg is not a chicken and an embryo is not a child″]. [The proposal for a regulation on the recognition of parenthood: An attempt to recognize surrogacy in the European Union?]
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1