A Critique of Three Objections to Phyician-Assisted Suicide  

Oleh:

Brock, Dan W.

Jenis: Article from Journal - ilmiah internasional
Dalam koleksi: Ethics: An International Journal of Social Political and Legal Philosophy vol. 109 no. 3 (Apr. 1999), page 519-547.
Topik: June; Objek Psikologi; Bunuh Diri; Relation; Ethics

Ketersediaan

Perpustakaan Pusat (Semanggi) Nomor Panggil: EE44.9 Non-tandon: 1 (dapat dipinjam: 0) Tandon: tidak ada

Lihat Detail Induk

Isi artikel

In June 1997 the U.S. Supreme Court reversed decisions in the Ninth and second Federal Circuit Court of Appeals that had held that state laws prohibiting physician-assisted suicide (PAS) in Washington and New York, respectively, were unconstitutional. The decisions left states free to craft policy on PAS and to prohibit it, as most states now do, or to permit it under one or another regulatory system, as Oregon now does. While I believe there is a plausible constituional argument that can be, and was, made for a constitually protected liberty interest in determining "the time and manner of one's death," as the Ninth Federal Circuit Court's opinion put it, the present Supreme Court has made clear that is does not accept any such broad right. Some commentators , as well as more than one of justices, have interpreted the Court's decision as leaving open the possibilty of accepting a more narrowly framed right to physician-assited suicide in the future, but for now the principal focus of efforts to secure such a right will return to the states, either through refenda or legislatuive action, where it had been before two circuit court opinions.

Opini Anda

Klik untuk menuliskan opini Anda tentang koleksi ini!

Kembali