Euthanasia, letting die and the pause.

There is a marked disparity between medical intuitions and philosophical argument about euthanasia. In this paper I argue that the following objections can be raised. First, medical intuitions are against it and this is an area in which judgement and sensitivity are required in that death is a unique and complex process and the patient has many needs including the need to know that others have not discounted his or her worth. Also, part of the moral constitution of a good doctor is a devotion to the protection and preservation of life whatever reasons are produced to dissuade her. Finally, we do not know what the final events of a person's life might hold.     

安乐死与生命权的保护

安乐死的争议包括主动安乐死和生命自主性的关系，以及被动安乐死的理由。要解决这些问题，必须探究宪法生命权的涵义。生命权的本质是自由权，也就是个人自主安排自己生死的权利，这种权利可以授权医生协助其安乐死。对于非自愿的安乐死患者，仍然应该根据生命权的逻辑加以安排，将选择交给患者的家属。宪法学对安乐死问题的回答，解决的是国家的立场，并不排斥公民基于个人的良心做出自己的价值判断。     

自主性、他者与安乐死

自愿而积极的安乐死的实现必须有“他者”的介入才具有现实性。完全的自主性是个抽象的理论原则，在实践中存在着逻辑困难。“他者”在生命态度、家庭关系、社会关系和医师方面对自主性构成了限制，也使安乐死的实现有了现实根据。个体在自主选择安乐死意愿时，应当坚持尊重原则、协商原则和自主原则。这些原则也是未来安乐死立法中应当坚持的原则。