{"title":"In Whose Interests?","authors":"E. Jackson","doi":"10.1093/OSO/9780198852681.003.0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter will argue that the core justification for the United Kingdom’s ‘blanket ban’ on assisted suicide—namely that it is necessary in order to protect ‘the vulnerable’—has tended to obscure two other important sets of interests. First, it has served to marginalize the interests of patients who are not vulnerable, and who have been used to exercising considerable control over their lives. There is evidence from countries which have legalized assisted dying that it is this non-vulnerable group of patients who are its principal users. Second, the core justification for the ‘blanket ban’ has deflected attention away from the interests of the medical profession itself, which in the United Kingdom has a long tradition of organized and powerful opposition to assisted suicide.","PeriodicalId":383940,"journal":{"name":"On Crime, Society, and Responsibility in the work of Nicola Lacey","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"On Crime, Society, and Responsibility in the work of Nicola Lacey","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780198852681.003.0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This chapter will argue that the core justification for the United Kingdom’s ‘blanket ban’ on assisted suicide—namely that it is necessary in order to protect ‘the vulnerable’—has tended to obscure two other important sets of interests. First, it has served to marginalize the interests of patients who are not vulnerable, and who have been used to exercising considerable control over their lives. There is evidence from countries which have legalized assisted dying that it is this non-vulnerable group of patients who are its principal users. Second, the core justification for the ‘blanket ban’ has deflected attention away from the interests of the medical profession itself, which in the United Kingdom has a long tradition of organized and powerful opposition to assisted suicide.
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
为了谁的利益?
本章将论证英国“全面禁止”协助自杀的核心理由——即为了保护“弱势群体”,这是必要的——往往掩盖了另外两组重要的利益。首先,它使不容易受到伤害的病人的利益被边缘化,他们已经习惯于对自己的生活行使相当大的控制权。已经使协助死亡合法化的国家有证据表明,这一非弱势群体的病人是辅助死亡的主要使用者。其次,“全面禁令”的核心理由转移了人们对医疗行业本身利益的关注,在英国,有组织地、强有力地反对协助自杀的传统由来已久。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
In Whose Interests? ‘Technologies of Responsibility’ Re-Situating Criminal Responsibility Responsibility and Explanations of Rape Why Blame?
×
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