Harms to dignity, bioethics, and the scope of biolaw.
Dignity is an expansive ideal, figuring in international covenants, codes of research involving human participants, and debates about decision making at the end of life. One result of this expansiveness is that human dignity can be appropriated by proponents on both sides of many issues, thereby appearing more as a rhetorical flourish than as a serious element in argumentation. However, an appreciation of narrative inquiry shows that opposing representations of dignity constitute alternative assessments of responsible action, both of which can be morally reasonable. One implication is that normative disagreements, as between deathbed decisions about palliative care or euthanasia, can be expected to occur, so that the ideal of dignity should be legally expressed in a practice of supportive laissez-faire in preference to any undue regulation of dying.
Simpson
Evan
E
Department of Philosophy, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada.
D001293:Attitude to Death; D001675:Bioethics; D003657:Decision Making; D005610:Freedom; D006808:Humanism; D006801:Humans; D009014:Morals; D033262:Narration; D026684:Personal Autonomy; D010686:Philosophy, Medical; D012297:Right to Die / Q000941:ethics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D012944:Social Support; D017236:Suicide, Assisted / Q000941:ethics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence / Q000523:psychology; D013727:Terminal Care / Q000941:ethics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence / Q000523:psychology; D019452:Terminally Ill / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence / Q000523:psychology