Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An Analysis of the Key Arguments on Both Sides

  • Chapter
Assisted Suicide: The Liberal, Humanist Case Against Legalization

  • 583 Accesses

Abstract

The real difficulty with the existing debate is that there is little recognition that, ultimately, the assisted suicide debate is philosophical and moral rather than religious, political, legal or sociological. In fact, there is a fundamental difference between the sides in that proponents tend to put forward political reasons for allowing assisted suicide whereas opponents stick to religious reasons for their opposition. Perhaps this is the reason why the discussion does not seem to move; both sides argue from utterly different cultural frameworks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. Margaret Somerville, Death Talk: The Case against Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide (Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2001), p. 107.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Kevin Yuill, ‘In the Wake of Teni Schiavo, the Real Slippery Slope’, Journal of Cancer Pain and Symptom Palliation, vol. 1, no. 2 (2005), pp. 43–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Nigel Biggar, Aiming to Kill: The Ethics of Suicide and Euthanasia (London: Darton, Longman and Todd Ltd., 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Theo A. Boer, ‘Recurring Themes in the Debate about Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide’, Journal of Religious Ethics, vol. 35, no. 3 (September 2007), pp. 529–555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Arthur J. Dyck, Life’s Worth: The Case against Assisted Suicide (Cambridge, MA: Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity, 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Neil M. Gorsuch, The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Leo Alexander, ‘Medical Science under Dictatorship’, New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 241, no. 2 (1949), pp. 39–47

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Thomas Q. Martin, ‘Euthanasia and Modem. Morality: Their Moral Implications’, The Jurist Vol. X (January-October, 1950), pp. 437–464

    Google Scholar 

  9. See Wesley J. Smith, Forced Exi t: The Slippery Slope from A ssisted Suicide to Legalized Murder (New York: Times Books, 1997)

    Google Scholar 

  10. John Keown, Euthanasia, Ethics, and Public Policy: An Argument against Legalisation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  11. B. Steinbock, ‘The Case for Physician-assisted Suicide: Not Yet Proven’, Journal of Medical Ethics, vol. 31 (2005), pp. 235–241

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. D. A. Pratt and B. Steinbock, ‘Death with Dignity or Unlawful Killing: The Ethical and Legal Debate over Physician-assisted Death’, Criminal Law Bulletin 33 (1997). pp. 226–261

    Google Scholar 

  13. Glanville Williams, The Sanctity of Life and the Criminal Law (London: Faber and Faber, 1958), p. 281.

    Google Scholar 

  14. See, for instance, Diane Coleman, ‘Assisted Suicide Laws Create Discriminatory Double Standard for Who Gets Suicide Prevention and Who Gets Suicide Assistance: Not Dead Yet Responds to Autonomy, Inc.’, Disability and Health Journal, vol. 3 (2010), pp. 39–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Leon R. Kass, ‘Neither for Love nor Money: Why Doctors Must Not Kill’, Public Merest, 94 (Winter 1989), p. 25.

    Google Scholar 

  16. See, for example, Nadine Spiegel, ‘Euthanasia and Physician-assisted Suicide: Effect on the Doctor-Patient Relationship’, PennBioethics Journal, vol. 1, no. 1 (Spring 2005), pp. 1–3.

    Google Scholar 

  17. See Kathleen M. Foley and Herbert Hendin (eds), The Case against Assisted Suicide: The Case for the Right to End-of-Life Care (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Peter Singer, Rethinking Life and Death: The Collapse of Our Traditional Ethics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995), 196.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Margaret Pabst Battin, Ending Life: Ethics and the Way We Die (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005), p. 18.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  20. Ronald Dworkin, ‘Introduction’ to ‘Assisted Suicide: The Philosophers’ Brief, New York Review of Books vol. XLIV, No. 5, 27 March 1997, pp. 41–45

    Google Scholar 

  21. Paul Badham, Is There a Christian Case for Assisted Dying? (London: SPCK Publications, 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Timothy E. Quill and Jane Greenlaw, ‘Physician-assisted Death’, in Mary Crowley (ed.), From Birth to Death and Bench to Clinic: The Hastings Center Bioethics Briefing Book for Journalists, Policymakers, and Campaigns (Garrison: The Hastings Center, 2008), pp. 137–142

    Google Scholar 

  23. Sheila McLean, Assisted Dying: Reflections on the Need for Law Reform (London: Routledge, 2007), pp. 34

    Google Scholar 

  24. Martha Nussbaum, ‘Compassion: The Basic Social Emotion’, Social Philosophy & Policy, vol. 13, no. 1 (1996), pp. 27–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Timothy Quill, ‘Criteria for Physician-assisted Suicide’, in Michael M. Uhlmann (ed.), Last Rights? Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia Debated (Washington, DC: Ethics and Public Policy Center, 1998), pp. 326–335

    Google Scholar 

  26. In Rachels’ scenario, both Smith and Jones stand to inherit a large amount of money from their respective six-year old cousins, should their cousins die. Smith drowns his young cousin while Jones, intending on the same act, chances upon his young cousin slipping on the bath and concussing himself. Jones then does not interfere with him drowning. Rachels used the fact that both acts are equally morally reprehensible to undermine the distinction between killing and letting die. James Rachels, ‘Active and Passive Euthanasia’, The New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 292 (1975), pp. 78–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Mary Wamock and Elisabeth Macdonald, Easeful Death: Is there a Case for Assisted Dying? (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008).

    Google Scholar 

  28. John Stuart Mill illustrates this principle with the example of a bridge: ‘if either a public officer or any one else saw a person attempting to cross a bridge which had been ascertained to be unsafe, and there were no time to warn him of his danger, they might seize him and turn him back without any real infringement of his liberty; for liberty consists in doing what one desires, and he does not desire to fall into the river. Nevertheless, when there is not a certainty, but only a danger of mischief, no one but the person himself can judge of the sufficiency of the motive which may prompt him to incur the risk: in this case, therefore (unless he is a child, or delirious, or in some state of excitement or absorption incompatible with the full use of the reflecting faculty) he ought, I conceive, to be only warned of the danger; not forcibly prevented from exposing himself to it.’ John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, C. L. Ten and Stephen M. Cahn (eds) (Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, 2005), p. 138.

    Google Scholar 

  29. See Timothy M. Quill and Margaret P. Battin, Physician-assisted Dying: The Case for Palliative Care and Patient Choice (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Sheila McLean, Assisted Dying: Reflections on the Need for Law Reform (London: Routledge, 2007)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Iain Brassington, ‘Five Words for Assisted Dying’, Law and Philosophy, 27 (2008), pp. 415–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. T. M. Scanlon, John Rawls, Robert Nozick, Ronald Dworkin and Judith Jarvis Thompson, ‘Assisted Suicide: The Philosophers’ Brief, New York Review of Books, 44 (27 March 1997), pp. 41–47.

    Google Scholar 

  33. John Hams, ‘Euthanasia and the Value of Life’, in John Keown (ed.), Euthanasia Examined: Ethical, Clinical and Legal Perspectives (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995), pp. 6–22

    Google Scholar 

  34. David Benatar, ‘Assisted Suicide, Voluntary Euthanasia, and the Right to Life’, in Jon Yorke (ed.), The Right to Life and the Value of Life (Farnham: Ashgate Publishing, 2010), pp. 291–310

    Google Scholar 

  35. See Robert I. Simon, MD, James L. Levenson, MD, and Daniel W. Shuman, JD, ‘On Sound and Unsound Mind: The Role of Suicide in Tort and Insurance Litigation’, Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, vol. 33, no. 2 (2005), pp. 176–182.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Cited in Alfred Alvarez, The Savage God: A Study of Suicide (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1971), p. 62.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Margaret P. Battin and Ryan Spellecy, ‘What Kind of Freedom? Szasz’s Misleading Perception of Physician-assisted Suicide’, in Jeffrey A. Schaler (ed.), Szasz Under Fire: The Psychiatric Abolitionist Faces His Critics (Chicago: Open Court, 2004), pp. 277–290.

    Google Scholar 

  38. John P. Safranek, ‘Autonomy and Assisted Suicide: The Execution of Freedom’, Hastings Center Report, vol. 28, no. 4 (1998), pp. 32–36.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Iain Brassington, ‘Five Words for Assisted Dying,’ Law and Philosophy (2008) 27, pp. 415–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. J. L. Lucas, Principles of Politics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1966), p. 101.

    Google Scholar 

  41. John Hardwig, ‘Is There a Duty to Die?’, Hastings Center Report, vol. 27, no. 2 (1997), pp 34–42

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Daniel Callahan, Setting Limits: Medical Goals in an Aging Society (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 1995).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Sunderland, UK

    Kevin Yuill

Authors
  1. Kevin Yuill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 2013 Kevin Yuill

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Yuill, K. (2013). An Analysis of the Key Arguments on Both Sides. In: Assisted Suicide: The Liberal, Humanist Case Against Legalization. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137286307_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation