• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利：CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法，用中文像聊天一样搜索，搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐，让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版，准确专业，支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式，支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述，25分钟生成高质量综述，智能提取关键信息，辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

Ethical debate: The distinction between withdrawing life sustaining treatment under the influence of paralysing agents and euthanasia. The doctrine of double effect is difficult but not impossible to apply.

作者信息

Edwards S J

机构信息

Centre for Ethics in Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.

出版信息

BMJ. 2001 Aug 18;323(7309):390-1.

PMID:11548688
Abstract
摘要

相似文献

1
Ethical debate: The distinction between withdrawing life sustaining treatment under the influence of paralysing agents and euthanasia. The doctrine of double effect is difficult but not impossible to apply.伦理辩论：在麻痹性药物影响下停止维持生命治疗与安乐死之间的区别。双重效应原则虽难以应用，但并非不可能。
BMJ. 2001 Aug 18;323(7309):390-1.
2
Ethical debate: The distinction between withdrawing life sustaining treatment under the influence of paralysing agents and euthanasia. Paralysing agents may be given up to but not at or beyond the point of extubation.伦理辩论：在麻痹剂作用下停止维持生命治疗与安乐死之间的区别。可以使用麻痹剂，但不能在拔管之时或之后使用。
BMJ. 2001 Aug 18;323(7309):389-90.
3
Ethical debate: The distinction between withdrawing life sustaining treatment under the influence of paralysing agents and euthanasia. Are we treading a fine line?伦理辩论：在麻痹药物影响下停止维持生命治疗与安乐死之间的区别。我们是否在走钢丝？
BMJ. 2001 Aug 18;323(7309):388-9. doi: 10.1136/bmj.323.7309.388.
4
Ethical debate: The distinction between withdrawing life sustaining treatment under the influence of paralysing agents and euthanasia. The parents perspective on withdrawing treatment.
BMJ. 2001 Aug 18;323(7309):390.
5
Withholding and withdrawing life-sustaining treatment in children.儿童生命维持治疗的撤除与 withhold（此处 withhold 直译为“ withhold”，在医学语境中结合前文可理解为“停止给予”之类更符合中文表达习惯的意思，但按要求不添加解释，直接保留英文原词）
Paediatr Anaesth. 2009 Oct;19(10):972-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9592.2009.03027.x.
6
Withdrawing life sustaining treatment and euthanasia debate. Doctrine of double effect should be discarded.
BMJ. 2001 Nov 24;323(7323):1248.
7
End-of-life decisions and respiratory disease.临终决策与呼吸系统疾病
Nurs Times. 2006;102(7):56, 59, 61.
8
Withdrawing life sustaining treatment and euthanasia debate. Double effect is different from euthanasia.
BMJ. 2001 Nov 24;323(7323):1248-9.
9
[Assisted dying and the principle of double effect].[辅助死亡与双重效应原则]
Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2002 Jun 14;114(10-11):415-21.
10
Withholding and withdrawing medical treatment: an emergency medicine perspective.中止和撤销医疗救治：急诊医学视角
Ann Emerg Med. 1996 Jul;28(1):51-4. doi: 10.1016/s0196-0644(96)70139-7.

引用本文的文献

1
Intending to avoid the treatment burdens only: the doctrine of double effect and withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining treatment.仅旨在避免治疗负担：双重效应原则与停止或撤销维持生命治疗
Theor Med Bioeth. 2025 Jun;46(3):209-230. doi: 10.1007/s11017-025-09712-7. Epub 2025 Mar 21.
2
How the Doctrine of Double Effect Rhetoric Harms Patients Seeking Voluntary Assisted Dying.双重效应修辞学如何伤害寻求自愿协助死亡的患者。
J Bioeth Inq. 2024 Dec;21(4):659-669. doi: 10.1007/s11673-024-10340-4. Epub 2024 Mar 29.
3
Is pain in the brain?
Nat Clin Pract Neurol. 2009 Feb;5(2):76-7. doi: 10.1038/ncpneuro1001.
4
Should euthanasia be legal? An international survey of neonatal intensive care units staff.安乐死应该合法化吗？一项针对新生儿重症监护病房工作人员的国际调查。
Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2004 Jan;89(1):F19-24. doi: 10.1136/fn.89.1.f19.