Jump to content

Home

Passive euthanasia: English court rules on sick baby care


Darth333

Recommended Posts

i'm not sure that doctors CAN just refuse to treat someone on business grounds. They have after all taken an oath to HELP people. It would certainly be morally wrong. It would almost certainly be against their oath (and get them disbarred) and it might well be against the law in some countries (like ones with good-samaritan acts).

 

That is not to say that they should always treat someone, just hat their oath would mean they should make that decision based on the best interests of the patient, not on business, financial or convienience reasons.

 

AFAIK these cases come before the courts quite often (in the uk at least) and the judges and doctors always make a point of saying that the judgement is unique and DOESN'T set a precedent.

I'd say that this is as it should be. Eg:

 

1 - The doctors make a recommendation based on the best interests of the child

2 - The parents decide whether to accept that recommendation

3 - If, and only if, the doctors feel that the parents are actively (for whatever reasons) harming the welfare of the child then they resort to the courts, who look at the individual details of the case, get expert and second opinions and then deliver a verdict unique to that case.

 

This is a sensible route that takes into account the unique aspects of a case, seeks to minimise harm and conflict and allows a resolution if conflict of opinion occurs.

It also probably has the added benefit that the parents will feel that they did everything they could to save their child, and will remove from them any guilt that they might feel over agreeing to let their child die. (which would be hard for any parent).

 

Passive Euthanasia for adults is a harder issue, and active euthanasia a harder still issue though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...