title: Euthanasia: a reply to Bartels and Otlowski.
abstract: This article counters arguments made by Bartels and Otlowski in 2010 regarding euthanasia. It suggests that the authors over-emphasised the importance of individual autonomy in its bearing on the euthanasia debate. Drawing on literature concerning elder abuse as well as the "mercy-killing" cases reviewed by Bartels and Otlowski, the article contends that legalising euthanasia may increase the risk that some patients are pressured, inadvertently or deliberately, to request access. Safeguards to detect and deter pressure may be of limited effectiveness against such pressure. Regarding slippery slope arguments, the article discusses the potential for an Australian euthanasia system to eventually be extended in scope to encompass mental suffering. The article encourages consideration of long-term potentialities, including changes in macro-economic conditions.
authors.affiliation: Faculty of Law, University of Tasmania. Jeremy.prichard@utas.edu.au
authors.forename: Jeremy
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Prichard
mesh_terms: D033101:Euthanasia, Active, Voluntary / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D006801:Humans; D012297:Right to Die / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D017236:Suicide, Assisted / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*