Hastening death and the boundaries of the self

Bioethics

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 105-111

  Jansen, Lynn A ^a,b,c  

^a John J Conley Department of Ethics St Vincent's   (United States)

^b John J Conley Department of Ethics at St Vincent's Manhattan   (United States)

^c NEW YORK MEDICAL COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Death; Natural artificial distinction; Pacemaker; Withdrawing aid

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DEATH; DECISION MAKING; DEVICE; ETHICS; HUMAN; MORALITY; PACEMAKER; PATIENT; SELF CONCEPT; SOCIAL ASPECT;

ANALYTICAL APPROACH; DEATH AND EUTHANASIA;

DECISION MAKING; ETHICAL ANALYSIS; EUTHANASIA, PASSIVE; HOMICIDE; HUMANS; PACEMAKER, ARTIFICIAL; PROSTHESES AND IMPLANTS; SELF CONCEPT; UNCERTAINTY;

EID: 33644990392     PISSN: 02699702     EISSN: 14678519     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8519.2006.00481.x     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. J.A. Withdrawing Very Low-Burden Interventions in Chronically Ill Patients JAMA 283 1061 1063
2. Actions, Intentions and Consequences: The Doctrine of Doing and Allowing Philos Rev 98 287 312
3. D.W. Brock. 1995. Euthanasia and sustaining life: ethical issues. In Encyclopedia of Bioethics. 2nd ed. W.T. Reich, ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company: 563-572.
4. Rhymes et al., op. cit. note 1.
5. We might instead speak of what is and is not a constituent of the person but, as we shall see, there is an intersubjective dimension to the issue that sits better with the idiom of the self than with that of the person. Nothing important, however, turns on this terminological question.
6. E.D. Decisions to Withdraw Life-Sustaining Treatment JAMA 283 1065 1067
7. N.S. Medical Futility and Care of The Dying Patient West J Med 163 287 291
8. L.J. N.S. A.R. Medical Futility: Its Meaning and Ethical Implications Ann Intern Med 112 949 954
9. F.A. R.M. Is it Ethical To Withdraw Low-Burden Interventions in Chronically Ill Patients letter JAMA 284
10. F.A. R.M. Deactivating the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: a biofixture analysis South Med J 93 20 23
11. M. Responsibility and the Boundaries of the Self Harv Law Rev 105
12. I assume here that the self is not a natural kind term.
13. For a general discussion of the vagueness problem see R.M. Sainsbury. 1995. Paradoxes. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press: 23-51.