죽임(Toten)과 죽게 내버려둠(Sterbenlassen)-인과성의 관점에서 바라본 부작위(Unterlassen)-
Killing or Letting Die? Omissions from a Causal Point of View
0
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Whereas active and direct euthanasia is ethically and legally prohibited, passive or indirect euthanasia is, except for special cases, acceptable and even recommendable. The actual difference between an intentional act of killing and an act of withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining treatment can be described most clearly in terms of the causal role of the physician. Active euthanasia represents a new cause of death: the patient’s death results from the physician’s medical intervention (iatrogenic). In the case of passive euthanasia, the cause of death is the patient’s underlying disease. But a physician’s omission’ which allows the patient to die may be a cause of the patient’s death in the sense of an inus-condition, that is, an insufficient but non-redundant part of an unnecessary but sufficient Condition. The inus-condition is responsible for the causation of the occurrence. Both killing and letting die are inus-conditions of minimally sufficient conditions of the patient’s death. The abandonment of withholding or withdrawing of persistence-treatment is thus causally responsible for the fatal outcome.
Abstract
Whereas active and direct euthanasia is ethically and legally prohibited, passive or indirect euthanasia is, except for special cases, acceptable and even recommendable. The actual difference between an intentional act of killing and an act of withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining treatment can be described most clearly in terms of the causal role of the physician. Active euthanasia represents a new cause of death: the patient’s death results from the physician’s medical intervention (iatrogenic). In the case of passive euthanasia, the cause of death is the patient’s underlying disease. But a physician’s omission’ which allows the patient to die may be a cause of the patient’s death in the sense of an inus-condition, that is, an insufficient but non-redundant part of an unnecessary but sufficient Condition. The inus-condition is responsible for the causation of the occurrence. Both killing and letting die are inus-conditions of minimally sufficient conditions of the patient’s death. The abandonment of withholding or withdrawing of persistence-treatment is thus causally responsible for the fatal outcome.
참고문헌 (10)
- Ramsey P., "The Patient as Person. Exploration in Medical Ethics", pp.151~ (1973), New Haven
- Mueller AW, "Toetung auf Verlangen - Wohltat oder Untat?", pp.103~ (1997), Stuttgart
- Brown BF, "On Killing and Letting Die", PACPA, 53, pp.162~ (1979)
- Kim MJ, "Selbstbestimmtes Sterben? Patientenautonomie und medizinische Entscheidungen am Lebensende", pp.98~ (2007), Universitaets und landesbibliothek Muenster
- Kuhse H., "Die Heiligkeit des Lebens in der Medizin", pp.58~62 (1994), Erlangen
- Mackie JL, "Causes and Condition", American Philosophical Quarterly, pp.245~264 (1965)
- Mackie JL, "The Cement of the Universe. A Study of Causation" (1977), Oxford University Press
- Kuhse H., "The Sancity-of-Life-Doctrine in Medicine - A Critique" (1987), Oxford
- Kuitert HM, "Der gewuenschte Tod. Euthanasie und humanes Sterben", Guetersloh, pp.42~43 (1991)
- Schoene-Seifert B, "Die Grenzen zwischen Toeten und Sterbenlassen", Jahrbuch fuer Wissenschaft und Ethik, pp.205~226 (1997)
