Clark A E
Seattle University School of Law, USA.
Tulane Law Rev. 1996 Nov;71(1):45-137.
In this Article, Professor Clark explores the contours of the current debate over physician-assisted death. She beings by focusing on the legal issues raised by statutory attempts to either legalize or criminalize physician-assisted death, with particular emphasis on the constitutional questions that are currently before the United States Supreme Court. She then examines physician-assisted death from both medical and societal perspectives. Professor Clark uses a thought experiment in which assisted death is facilitated by persons other than physicians, and in doing so, questions whether physicians are the proper persons in whom to rest power over assisted death. She points out the irony in a process that would set up physicians as protectors of individual autonomy, and ultimately concludes that by deferring to the medical profession in this process, we risk losing the very autonomy that assisted death is designed to effectuate.
在本文中,克拉克教授探讨了当前关于医生协助死亡的辩论概况。她首先聚焦于法定层面试图将医生协助死亡合法化或定罪所引发的法律问题,特别强调了美国最高法院目前面临的宪法问题。接着,她从医学和社会两个角度审视了医生协助死亡。克拉克教授运用了一个思想实验,其中协助死亡由医生以外的人促成,借此质疑医生是否是掌控协助死亡权力的合适人选。她指出了一个过程中的讽刺之处,即该过程会将医生树立为个人自主权的保护者,最终得出结论:在这个过程中听从医学专业意见,我们可能会失去协助死亡旨在实现的自主权。