首页
登录
职称英语
Among the most enduring of all horrors is the prospect of a slow, painful de
Among the most enduring of all horrors is the prospect of a slow, painful de
游客
2025-04-06
9
管理
问题
Among the most enduring of all horrors is the prospect of a slow, painful death. Those who witness the protracted terminal illness of a friend or relative often view the eventual death more as a relief than a tragedy.
But to make life or death decisions on behalf of a dying person unable to communicate his or her wishes is to enter a moral and legal minefield. Could a doctor be sued for withholding treatment and allowing someone to die—or for not allowing him or her to die? Could it ever be lawful to withhold food and water?
Legal moves are afoot which may settle these questions. Recently, a group on voluntary euthanasia proposed legislation to make documents known as "Advance Directives", or Living Wills, legally binding.
An Advance Directive sets out the kind of medical treatment a person wishes to receive, or not receive, should he or she ever be in a condition that prevents them expressing those wishes. Such documents, much in vogue in the US and some EU countries, are becoming increasingly popular in Britain.
A clear distinction must be drawn between actions requested by an Advance Directive, and active euthanasia, or "mercy killing". A doctor who took a positive step—such as giving a lethal injection—to help a patient die would, as the law stands, be guilty of murder or aiding and abetting suicide, depending on the circumstances.
An Advance Directive, however, requests only passive euthanasia: the withholding of medical treatment aimed solely at sustaining the life of a patient who is terminally ill or a vegetable(in a vegetative state). The definition of medical treatment, in such circumstances, can include food and water.
The enforceability of the Advance Directive stems from the notion, long accepted in English law, that a person who is both old enough to make an informed decision and composmentis, is entitled to refuse any medical treatment offered by a doctor, even if that refusal leads to the person’s death. A doctor who forces treatment on a patient against his or her wishes is, therefore, guilty of an assault. Case law exists in the US and several EU countries that extend this right of autonomy over one’s life to patients who write an Advance Directive refusing treatment and subsequently lose their reason. There is no reason, based on public policy or English case law, why an English court should treat previously made instructions any differently. [br] What is an Advance Directive?
选项
A、A decision made by a doctor on how to end a patient’s life.
B、A hospital document on how to treat a terminally ill patient.
C、A wish made by a patient on how he will be medically treated.
D、A law that prohibits mercy killing.
答案
C
解析
什么是事先指示?病人就如何接受治疗所表达的愿望。根据第四段第一句,事先指示制定病人希望或不希望接受的疗法。不管病人的病情是否妨碍他们表达那些愿望。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/4028650.html
相关试题推荐
TheprospecthasinfuriatedordinaryMexicans,whohaveseenthepurchasingpowe
Amongthemostenduringofallhorrorsistheprospectofaslow,painfulde
Inourcontemporaryculture,theprospectofcommunicatingwith—orevenlook
Inourcontemporaryculture,theprospectofcommunicatingwith—orevenlook
Inourcontemporaryculture,theprospectofcommunicatingwith—orevenlook
Inourcontemporaryculture,theprospectofcommunicatingwith—orevenlook
Inourcontemporaryculture,theprospectofcommunicatingwith—orevenlook
Inourcontemporaryculture,theprospectofcommunicatingwith—orevenlook
Inourcontemporaryculture,theprospectofcommunicatingwith—orevenlook
Inourcontemporaryculture,theprospectofcommunicatingwith—orevenlook
随机试题
求出一个齐次线性方程组,使它的基础解系由向量组成
A.0 B.0.43 C.0.75 D.-0.86
有一幼儿出现血尿,声像图显示为肾内实质性肿块,最可能为A.婴儿型多囊肾 B.肾
A.急性重型病毒性肝炎 B.急性普通型病毒性肝炎 C.两者均有 D.两者均
用反射波法检测桩完整性时,当应力波从软质材料进入硬质材料时,可见桩间反射,第一反
(1)求实数a,b的值;(4分)
关于凝血酶时间测定及甲苯胺蓝纠正试验,下列哪项叙述不正确A.甲苯胺蓝可中和肝素和
2012年该省全部工业增加值为:() A.14563.8亿元 B.131
下列关于具体的房地产估价工作中替代原则的说法,正确的有()。A.任何单位和
原位癌是指() A.黏膜下癌 B.早期浸润癌 C.原发部位的癌 D.未突
最新回复
(
0
)