<p>There is no stronger or more enduring prohibition in medicine than the rule against the killing of patients by doctors. This prohibition is rooted in some medical codes and principles. Out standing among the principles surrounding these prohibitions are the principles of beneficence and non-maleficience. The contents of these principles in a way mark the professional integrity of the physician. But the modern approach to health care services pulls a demand for the respect of the individual right of self-determination. This demand is now glaring in almost all the practices pertaining to health care services. In end of life decisions, this modern demand is found much in practices like physician- assisted suicide and euthanasia. It demands that the physician ought to respect the wish and choice of the patient, and so, must assist the patient in bringing about his or her death when requested. In such manner, this views the principle of autonomy as absolute and should not be overridden in any circumstance.</p><p>However, the physician on his part is part of the medical profession that has integrity to protect. This integrity in medical profession which demands that the physician works only towards the health care of the patient and to what reduces diseases and deaths often go contrary to this respect for individual autonomy. Thus faced with such requests by patients, the physician always sees his integrity in conflict with his demand to respect the autonomous choice of the patient and so has a dilemma in responding to such requests. This is the focus of this work,"Professional Integrity and the Dilemma in Physician- Assisted Suicide"</p><p>However, the centre of my argument in this work is not merely though necessary to develop general arguments for or against the general justification of PAS, but to critically view the role played by the physicians in assisting the death of their patients as it comes in conflict with the medical obligation and integrity. Is it morally right, out rightly wrong or in certain situation permissible that physicians respond positively to the request of the patients for PAS? This is the overarching moral problem in the morality of physician- assisted suicide, and this work will consider this in line with the main problem in the work “the dilemma of professional physicians in the assistance of suicide.</p>

<p>The two most controversial ends of life decisions are those in which physicians help patients take their lives and when the physician deliberately and directly intervenes to end the patients’ life upon his request. These are often referred to as voluntary euthanasia and physician assisted suicide. Voluntary euthanasia and physician assisted suicide have continued to be controversial public issues. This controversy has agitated the minds of great thinkers including ethicians, physicians, psychologists, moralists, philosophers even the patient himself. Hence the physician, patient, the public and policy makers have recently had to face several difficult questions.</p><p>Is it morally right to end the life of the patients? Is there any moral difference at all between Voluntary euthanasia and physician assisted suicide? Should a terminally ill patient be allowed to take his life and should the medical profession have the option of helping the patient die. Should voluntary euthanasia and physician assisted suicide be legalised at all? And what actually will be the legal and moral implications if they are allowed.</p><p>In a bid to find a lasting solution to these moral problems and questions has led to two different strong positions viz opponents and proponents of voluntary euthanasia and physician assisted suicide. The centre of my argument in this work is not to develop new general arguments for or against voluntary euthanasia and physician assisted suicide but to make a critical ethical comparative analysis of voluntary euthanasia and physician assisted suicide. This is the focus of my work. The sole aim of this work is neither to solely condemn nor to support voluntary euthanasia and physician assisted suicide but to critically analyze the two since we live in a world of pluralism.</p>

The two most controversial ends of life decisions are those in which physicians help patients take their lives and when the physician deliberately and directly intervenes to end the patients’ life upon his request. These are often referred to as voluntary euthanasia and physician assisted suicide. Voluntary euthanasia and physician assisted suicide have continued to be controversial public issues. This controversy has agitated the minds of great thinkers including ethicians, physicians, psychologists, moralists, philosophers even the patient himself. Hence the physician, patient, the public and policy makers have recently had to face several difficult questions. Is it morally right to end the life of the patients? Is there any moral difference at all between Voluntary euthanasia and physician assisted suicide? Should a terminally ill patient be allowed to take his life and should the medical profession have the option of helping the patient die. Should voluntary euthanasia and physician assisted suicide be legalised at all? And what actually will be the legal and moral implications if they are allowed. In a bid to find a lasting solution to these moral problems and questions has led to two different strong positions viz opponents and proponents of voluntary euthanasia and physician assisted suicide. The centre of my argument in this work is not to develop new general arguments for or against voluntary euthanasia and physician assisted suicide but to make a critical ethical comparative analysis of voluntary euthanasia and physician assisted suicide. This is the focus of my work. The sole aim of this work is neither to solely condemn nor to support voluntary euthanasia and physician assisted suicide but to critically analyze the two since we live in a world of pluralism.

This thesis proposes a model for legalized Physician-Assisted Suicide [PAS] for adoption into Canadian legislation. The basis of this model is one which respects the individual freedom to make end-of-life decisions free from state interference. The research herein supports the provisions contained in Oregon legislation where PAS has been legalized on the basis that the Oregon model is consistent with the guarantees afforded under s.7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Oregon maintains strict regulatory barriers which protect against the threat of abuse which the Supreme Court reasoned in Rodriguez outweighed her s.7 rights to autonomy. This thesis will engage in the theories of Ronald Dworkin who supports the preservation of the sanctity of human life which Sopinka J. held prevailed over s. 7 violations in Rodriguez and seeks a model which respects individual freedom without compromising that sanctity or value of life.

There is no stronger or more enduring prohibition in medicine than the rule against the killing of patients by doctors. This prohibition is rooted in some medical codes and principles. Out standing among the principles surrounding these prohibitions are the principles of beneficence and non-maleficience. The contents of these principles in a way mark the professional integrity of the physician. But the modern approach to health care services pulls a demand for the respect of the individual right of self-determination. This demand is now glaring in almost all the practices pertaining to health care services. In end of life decisions, this modern demand is found much in practices like physician- assisted suicide and euthanasia. It demands that the physician ought to respect the wish and choice of the patient, and so, must assist the patient in bringing about his or her death when requested. In such manner, this views the principle of autonomy as absolute and should not be overridden in any circumstance. However, the physician on his part is part of the medical profession that has integrity to protect. This integrity in medical profession which demands that the physician works only towards the health care of the patient and to what reduces diseases and deaths often go contrary to this respect for individual autonomy. Thus faced with such requests by patients, the physician always sees his integrity in conflict with his demand to respect the autonomous choice of the patient and so has a dilemma in responding to such requests. This is the focus of this work,"Professional Integrity and the Dilemma in Physician- Assisted Suicide" However, the centre of my argument in this work is not merely though necessary to develop general arguments for or against the general justification of PAS, but to critically view the role played by the physicians in assisting the death of their patients as it comes in conflict with the medical obligation and integrity. Is it morally right, out rightly wrong or in certain situation permissible that physicians respond positively to the request of the patients for PAS? This is the overarching moral problem in the morality of physician- assisted suicide, and this work will consider this in line with the main problem in the work “the dilemma of professional physicians in the assistance of suicide.

This thesis proposes a model for legalized Physician-Assisted Suicide [PAS] for adoption into Canadian legislation. The basis of this model is one which respects the individual freedom to make end-of-life decisions free from state interference. The research herein supports the provisions contained in Oregon legislation where PAS has been legalized on the basis that the Oregon model is consistent with the guarantees afforded under s.7 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Oregon maintains strict regulatory barriers which protect against the threat of abuse which the Supreme Court reasoned in Rodriguez outweighed her s.7 rights to autonomy. This thesis will engage in the theories of Ronald Dworkin who supports the preservation of the sanctity of human life which Sopinka J. held prevailed over s. 7 violations in Rodriguez and seeks a model which respects individual freedom without compromising that sanctity or value of life.

Several longitudinal studies show that over time the American public has become more approving of euthanasia and suicide for terminally ill persons. Yet, these previous findings are limited because they derive from biased estimates of disaggregated hierarchical data. Using insights from life course sociological theory and recently developed cross-classified mixed effects logistic regression, I better account for this liberalization process by disentangling the age, period, and cohort effects that contribute to longitudinal changes in these attitudes. Findings indicate that while attitudes toward euthanasia and suicide have liberalized over time, they remained relatively stable over the past 10 years. Furthermore, this study finds significant age effects in which the probability of agreement to euthanasia and suicide steadily decreases throughout the life course. Contrary to previous research, this study finds that when controlling for age and period effects, there are no significant birth-cohort effects that contribute to longitudinal changes in these attitudes.

The goal of this thesis is to investigate the literature on physician-assisted death (PAD) in the United States and argue for the legalization of PAD. This thesis discusses the historical and contemporary legal literature of PAD as well as the concerns voiced by opponents of PAD. This thesis addresses the concerns of PAD opponents and invalidating some concerns and and attenuating others. Proper implementation of PAD is proposed via Mandatory Psychiatric Review (MPR) and other psychological services. Further improvements needed in PAD policy are discussed as well as the current benefits of PAD.

In 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in the Carter decision that the prohibitions against physician-assisted dying, as outlined in section 241(b) of the Criminal Code of Canada, were unconstitutional as they violated an individual’s s.7 rights as outlined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Though the jurisprudence of this landmark decision and subsequent amendments to Canadian law are interesting in and of themselves, what is particularly interesting about Carter is the framework within which physician-assisted dying is conceptualized. The Court shifts from a religiously informed framework for conceptualizing assisted suicide to a non-religious conceptualization of physician-assisted dying. Given that there remains much to be explored about nonreligion, this thesis asks: how is ‘nonreligion’ constructed by law in relation to physician-assisted dying in Canada? Since the Carter decision is not explicitly about religion or nonreligion the analysis in this thesis maps how the concepts life, death, and morality are reconceptualized. The analysis reveals that nonreligion is a phenomenon that is absent of the transcendent and is instead given positive content through a focus on autonomy. The conceptualization of nonreligion as presented in this thesis contributes to the literature that emphasizes that nonreligion is both positive and meaningful and not simply deficit terminology.

Assisted suicide in the perspective of the Czech criminal law and a comparison with the common law Abstract The strict prohibition on assisted suicide does not reach full acceptance among the members of the Czech society, regardless of their professional or non-professional background, similarly as it did not reach full acceptance in some of the common law countries, which consequently departed or are soon to depart from this regulatory conception. The objective of the two so far proposed Czech bills was identical, however, owing to the lack of clarity and detail, which certainly did not amount to the seriousness of the issue they aimed to regulate, none of them was successful. Hence, the legislative works were recommenced last year and resulted in the third bill, which claimed to be much more elaborative on the key issues and accordingly precise in the usage of language. Although the bill has not been introduced yet, the assumptions based not only on the territorial proximity are, that its prime source of inspiration resided mostly in the permissive regulatory attitude towards assisted suicide (or voluntary, active and intentional, euthanasia) as implemented in the European countries. However, notwithstanding the utter differences in the conception of the common law legal system, especially for such...