title: Euthanasia: why it doesn't matter (much) what the doctor thinks and why there is no suggestion that doctors should have a duty to kill.
abstract: A major reason that The Netherlands has taken a different approach to the rest of the world on such a fundamental moral issue is that the courts and legislature in that country have accorded the interests of doctors a cardinal role in the euthanasia debate. This article argues that the interests of doctors are of only incidental and peripheral relevance in relation to the moral status of euthanasia. The moral status of euthanasia has little to do with the preparedness of doctors to administer the lethal injection or their general attitude towards the practice. Euthanasia is principally about the interests of the patient and the impact that the practice may have on the community in general, not preserving the conscience or improving the working life of doctors.
authors.affiliation: School of Law, Deakin University, Burwood, Vic. 3125, Australia.
authors.forename: Mirko
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Bagaric
authors.forename: Kumar
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Amarasekara
mesh_terms: D001293:Attitude to Death; D005065:Euthanasia / Q000941:ethics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D006801:Humans; D028681:Moral Obligations; D009426:Netherlands; D010819:Physician's Role; D010820:Physicians / Q000941:ethics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D012297:Right to Die / Q000941:ethics; D017236:Suicide, Assisted / Q000941:ethics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D026712:Value of Life