Duckett S
Grattan Institute, 8 Malvina Place, Carlton, VIC, 3053, Australia.
J Bioeth Inq. 2018 Mar;15(1):33-37. doi: 10.1007/s11673-017-9827-4. Epub 2017 Dec 11.
A recent administrative law decision in Victoria, Australia, applied double effect reasoning in a novel way. Double effect reasoning has hitherto been used to legitimate treatments which may shorten life but where the intent of treatment is pain relief. The situation reviewed by the Victorian tribunal went further, supporting actions where a doctor agrees to provide pentobarbitone (Nembutal) to a patient at some time in the future if the patient feels at that time that his pain is unbearable and he wants to end his life. The offer to provide the drug was described as a palliative treatment in that it gave reassurance and comfort to the patient. Double effect reasoning was extended in this instance to encompass potentially facilitating a patient's death. This extension further muddies the murky double effect reasoning waters and creates another challenge to this concept.
澳大利亚维多利亚州最近的一项行政法裁决以一种新颖的方式运用了双重效应推理。迄今为止，双重效应推理一直被用于使那些可能缩短生命但治疗意图是缓解疼痛的治疗方法合法化。维多利亚州法庭审查的情况更进一步，支持医生同意在未来某个时候，如果患者当时觉得自己的疼痛无法忍受且想要结束生命，就向其提供戊巴比妥（速可眠）的行为。提供这种药物的提议被描述为一种姑息治疗，因为它给患者带来了安心和慰藉。在这种情况下，双重效应推理的范围得到了扩展，将可能促使患者死亡的情况也涵盖在内。这种扩展进一步搅浑了双重效应推理这潭浑水，给这一概念带来了另一个挑战。
