title: Euthanasia.
abstract: The principles of self-determination and individual well-being support the use of voluntary euthanasia by those who do not have moral or professional objections to it. Opponents of this posture cite the ethical wrongness of the act itself and the folly of any public or legal policy permitting euthanasia. Positive consequences of making euthanasia legally permissible respect the autonomy of competent patients desiring it, expand the population of patients who can choose the option, and release the dying patient from otherwise prolonged suffering and agony. Potentially bad consequences of permitting euthanasia include the undermining of the "moral center" of medicine by allowing physicians to kill, the weakening of society's commitment to provide optimal care for dying patients, and, of greatest concern, the "slippery slope" argument. The evaluation of the arguments leads to support for euthanasia, with its performance not incompatible with a physician's professional commitment.
authors.affiliation: Department of Philosophy, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
authors.forename: D W
authors.initials: DW
authors.lastname: Brock
mesh_terms: D026686:Beneficence; D004992:Ethics, Medical; D005065:Euthanasia / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D028601:Euthanasia, Active; D033101:Euthanasia, Active, Voluntary; D006801:Humans; D033182:Intention; D026684:Personal Autonomy; D010819:Physician's Role; D011640:Public Policy; D018570:Risk Assessment; D012945:Social Values; D013315:Stress, Psychological; D035502:Trust; D014481:United States; D035761:Wedge Argument; D028761:Withholding Treatment