死亡中的医疗援助、滑坡和护理的可用性：对科赫的回复。

IF 1.3 4区哲学 Q3 ETHICS Hec Forum Pub Date : 2024-12-09 DOI:10.1007/s10730-024-09543-4

Don A Merrell

{"title":"死亡中的医疗援助、滑坡和护理的可用性：对科赫的回复。","authors":"Don A Merrell","doi":"10.1007/s10730-024-09543-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 2021, Canada revised its Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) law, removing the \"reasonably foreseeable death\" requirement. Opponents of MAID voiced concerns about a \"slippery slope\" leading to broader access, with some arguing the line has already been crossed. I examine the arguments against expanded eligibility, particularly those presented by Tom Koch (2023). Koch's reasoning, I submit, is flawed, lacking nuance in its understanding of the slippery slope and relying on a problematic argument about healthcare access.","PeriodicalId":46160,"journal":{"name":"Hec Forum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Medical Assistance in Dying, Slippery Slopes, and Availability of Care: A Reply to Koch.\",\"authors\":\"Don A Merrell\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10730-024-09543-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In 2021, Canada revised its Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) law, removing the \\\"reasonably foreseeable death\\\" requirement. Opponents of MAID voiced concerns about a \\\"slippery slope\\\" leading to broader access, with some arguing the line has already been crossed. I examine the arguments against expanded eligibility, particularly those presented by Tom Koch (2023). Koch's reasoning, I submit, is flawed, lacking nuance in its understanding of the slippery slope and relying on a problematic argument about healthcare access.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46160,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hec Forum\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hec Forum\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10730-024-09543-4\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hec Forum","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10730-024-09543-4","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

2021年，加拿大修订了《死亡医疗援助法》，取消了“合理可预见死亡”的要求。MAID的反对者对导致更广泛的访问的“滑坡效应”表示担忧，一些人认为这条线已经越过了。我研究了反对扩大资格的论点，特别是汤姆·科赫（2023）提出的论点。我认为，科赫的推理是有缺陷的，缺乏对滑坡效应的细微理解，并且依赖于一个有问题的关于医疗保健获取的论点。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

Medical Assistance in Dying, Slippery Slopes, and Availability of Care: A Reply to Koch.

In 2021, Canada revised its Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) law, removing the "reasonably foreseeable death" requirement. Opponents of MAID voiced concerns about a "slippery slope" leading to broader access, with some arguing the line has already been crossed. I examine the arguments against expanded eligibility, particularly those presented by Tom Koch (2023). Koch's reasoning, I submit, is flawed, lacking nuance in its understanding of the slippery slope and relying on a problematic argument about healthcare access.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Hec Forum ETHICS-

CiteScore

3.70

自引率

13.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： HEC Forum is an international, peer-reviewed publication featuring original contributions of interest to practicing physicians, nurses, social workers, risk managers, attorneys, ethicists, and other HEC committee members. Contributions are welcomed from any pertinent source, but the text should be written to be appreciated by HEC members and lay readers. HEC Forum publishes essays, research papers, and features the following sections:Essays on Substantive Bioethical/Health Law Issues Analyses of Procedural or Operational Committee Issues Document Exchange Special Articles International Perspectives Mt./St. Anonymous: Cases and Institutional Policies Point/Counterpoint Argumentation Case Reviews, Analyses, and Resolutions Chairperson''s Section `Tough Spot'' Critical Annotations Health Law Alert Network News Letters to the Editors