现代安乐死制度下不值得活下去的生命。
Lives Not Worth Living in Modern Euthanasia Regimes.
作者信息
Kim Scott
机构信息
Department of Bioethics, Clinical Center, National Institutes of Health, 10 Center Drive, 1C118, Bethesda, MD 20892-1156, USA.
出版信息
J Policy Pract Intellect Disabil. 2019 Jun;16(2):134-136. doi: 10.1111/jppi.12300. Epub 2019 Jun 27.
ISSUES
The authors of "The Quiet Progress of the New Eugenics" (QPNE) assert that some current practices, such as euthanasia and/or assisted suicide (EAS) for disabled newborns, imply that some persons with disabilities have lives that are not worth living.
FINDING
I extend the QPNE's analysis in this commentary by exploring whether even in EAS for 'unbearable suffering,' the question of how we value the lives of disabled persons arises in a way that deserves more public discussion. I argue that the old and modern EAS regimes both create a class of persons whose lives are deemed by society as not worth living. I explain how the modern EAS regime's public goal of relieving suffering and its requirement for autonomous choice obscure but do not erase this fact.
CONCLUSIONS
Although modern EAS regimes are based on suffering (not eugenics) and voluntary (not state coerced), they have the effect of creating lives that are societally deemed to be not worth living.
问题
《新优生学的悄然进展》（QPNE）的作者断言，当前的一些做法，比如对残疾新生儿实施安乐死和/或协助自杀（EAS），意味着一些残疾人的生命不值得活下去。
研究发现
在这篇评论中，我扩展了QPNE的分析，探讨即使在因“无法忍受的痛苦”而实施的EAS中，我们如何看待残疾人生命的问题是否以一种值得更多公众讨论的方式出现。我认为，旧的和现代的EAS制度都造就了一类其生命被社会视为不值得活下去的人。我解释了现代EAS制度减轻痛苦的公共目标及其自主选择的要求是如何掩盖但并未消除这一事实的。
结论
尽管现代EAS制度基于痛苦（而非优生学）且是自愿的（而非国家强制的），但它们产生了一种效果，即造就了一些被社会认为不值得活下去的生命。
Zotero 插件