Right-to-die debate continues in legislatures and courts.

Hospital ethics Pub Date : 1993-05-01
{"title":"Right-to-die debate continues in legislatures and courts.","authors":"","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although right-to-die initiatives have failed in Washington and California in recent years, the issue will resurface in Ohio and New Hampshire later this year. In a Gannett News Service article published in the April 12 Chicago Sun-Times, Ross Goldstein, a San Francisco psychologist and \"trend tracker,\" states that physician-assisted suicide will soon become accepted. He predicts a new form of doctor/manager will surface to help families decide whether to take this step and how to do so. \"Baby boomers don't turn over authority to their doctors,\" he says. \"When they reach the end state, they will expect to be part of the decision-making team.\" For now, the debate centers around individual cases and two different approaches, as exemplified by two different proponents. On the one hand is Jack Kevorkian, who envisions a network of death doctors or \"obitiatrists\" practicing \"medicine.\" On the other is Timothy Quill, who calls for more humane care for the dying and the legalization of physician-assisted suicide, but with strict guidelines and in the confines of a long-term doctor-patient relationship. The following articles look at reactions in Michigan toward Kevorkian and at a case in British Columbia that may reach the Supreme Court of Canada.</p>","PeriodicalId":79630,"journal":{"name":"Hospital ethics","volume":"9 3","pages":"9-10"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1993-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hospital ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","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

Although right-to-die initiatives have failed in Washington and California in recent years, the issue will resurface in Ohio and New Hampshire later this year. In a Gannett News Service article published in the April 12 Chicago Sun-Times, Ross Goldstein, a San Francisco psychologist and "trend tracker," states that physician-assisted suicide will soon become accepted. He predicts a new form of doctor/manager will surface to help families decide whether to take this step and how to do so. "Baby boomers don't turn over authority to their doctors," he says. "When they reach the end state, they will expect to be part of the decision-making team." For now, the debate centers around individual cases and two different approaches, as exemplified by two different proponents. On the one hand is Jack Kevorkian, who envisions a network of death doctors or "obitiatrists" practicing "medicine." On the other is Timothy Quill, who calls for more humane care for the dying and the legalization of physician-assisted suicide, but with strict guidelines and in the confines of a long-term doctor-patient relationship. The following articles look at reactions in Michigan toward Kevorkian and at a case in British Columbia that may reach the Supreme Court of Canada.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
关于死亡权利的辩论在立法机构和法院仍在继续。
尽管近年来华盛顿州和加利福尼亚州的死亡权利倡议失败了,但今年晚些时候,这个问题将在俄亥俄州和新罕布什尔州重新浮出水面。在甘尼特新闻服务4月12日《芝加哥太阳时报》上发表的一篇文章中,旧金山心理学家和“趋势追踪者”罗斯·戈尔茨坦指出,医生协助自杀将很快被接受。他预测,一种新型的医生/经理将会出现,以帮助家庭决定是否采取这一步骤以及如何采取这一步骤。“婴儿潮一代不会把权力交给医生,”他说。“当他们达到最终状态时,他们会期望成为决策团队的一员。”目前,辩论围绕着个别案例和两种不同的方法展开,正如两位不同的支持者所例证的那样。一方面是Jack Kevorkian,他设想了一个死亡医生或“产科医生”执业“医学”的网络。另一方是蒂莫西·奎尔(Timothy Quill),他呼吁对临终者给予更人道的关怀,并将医生协助自杀合法化,但要有严格的指导方针,并限制在长期的医患关系范围内。下面的文章着眼于密歇根州对Kevorkian的反应,以及不列颠哥伦比亚省的一个案件,该案件可能会提交给加拿大最高法院。
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
Managed care woes accumulate. Social responsibility model proposed for organizational ethics. Ohio patients go public to raise funds for services. HCFA issues final rule for PSDA (Patient Self-Determination Act of 1990). Debates over assisted dying continue to spread.
×
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