从我国现行法律看安乐死的实施

安乐死作为自然人在特殊情况下对自己生命自主选择的权利,涉及人的生命权益,有关生命权立法是安乐死问题的关键.安乐死的实施与我国现行法律对生命权的严格维护产生冲突,需要我国用法律的形式肯定安乐死,并对现行法律做出适当调整,为安乐死立法留下法律空间.     

安乐死立法比较兼立法原则理论初探

通过介绍与借鉴荷兰、美国、日本、比利时等国安乐死立法经验,结合我国立法难的现状,对我国安乐死立法进程进行思考,同时建设性提出了我国安乐死的立法原则:生命权神圣不可侵犯原则,死亡方式选择权有限制的自主决定原则,知情自愿原则,严格程序原则等。     

安乐死立法比较兼立法原则理论初探

通过介绍与借鉴荷兰、美国、日本、比利时等国安乐死立法经验,结合我国立法难的现状,对我国安乐死立法进程进行思考,同时建设性提出了我国安乐死的立法原则:生命权神圣不可侵犯原则,死亡方式选择权有限制的自主决定原则,知情自愿原则,严格程序原则等.     

对缺陷新生儿安乐死问题的理性思考

分析目前我国存在着的半公开的、隐蔽的缺陷新生儿安乐死行为,因家庭负担、社会宽容态度和相关法律不完善致使该现象长期存在.当务之急是制定缺陷新生儿处置法规并将其作为整个出生缺陷干预立法的重要组成部分,以此来避免缺陷新生儿安乐死行为的滥用和无序,保障成千上万非严重缺陷新生儿的生命权益.     

磐路论证：安乐死立法的可能性出路

目前,安乐死立法已成为一个不得以任何借口回避的国际性生命伦理问题。为了应对滑坡论证对安乐死立法的质疑,磐路论证主张把苦难、自律、伦理委员会和临终护理等要素有机统一起来,构筑成一条具有一定可行性的安乐死立法的磐石之路。     

安乐死立法研究的重要进展

我国于80年代以来开始进行安乐死的研究和讨论,《健康报》于1988年4～8月进行了专栏讨论,90%的读者支持安乐死。广大群众对实行安乐死的愿望越来越高,多次出现自发安乐死行为,但这种行为没有法律依据和保障,往往发生纠纷没有相关的法律准绳来处理。第八届全国人大第四次会议期间,北京、上海的60多位代表提出两个议案,要求尽快立法制定《安乐死实施条例》。在我国依法实施安乐死,标志着安乐死研究开始进入立法阶段。1998年山东中医药大学祝世讷教授领导的安乐死课题组提出的《安乐死暂行条例(草案·建议稿)》及其《说明》(以下简称“祝氏《草…     

安乐死合法化的哲学辩护——以自由主义哲学为视角

安乐死问题一直都是一个争议性话题。从学理上,安乐死可以分为自愿安乐死和无意愿安乐死。自由主义的伦理学分为义务论和功利主义。以自由主义哲学观来审视两类安乐死合法化问题:自愿安乐死体现病人自由意志的选择,是人格尊严之自主性的结果;无意愿安乐死是由利益相关人代为选择,符合社会利益的最大化。通过严格立法来规范安乐死行为,也应成为我国法律的理性选择。     

安乐死合法化的哲学辩护——以自由主义哲学为视角

安乐死问题一直都是一个争议性话题.从学理上,安乐死可以分为自愿安乐死和无意愿安乐死.自由主义的伦理学分为义务论和功利主义.以自由主义哲学观来审视两类安乐死合法化问题:自愿安乐死体现病人自由意志的选择,是人格尊严之自主性的结果;无意愿安乐死是由利益相关人代为选择,符合社会利益的最大化.通过严格立法来规范安乐死行为,也应成为我国法律的理性选择.     

安乐死对象的界定

目前关于安乐死对象的界定,突出了医学要件,忽略了权利要件。为安乐死立法,必须对安乐死对象作出法律界定,应该满足两个条件：一是自然条件,即存在死亡痛苦;二是权利条件,即公民享得并行使安乐死的权利。不规定和具备权利条件,仅存在死亡痛苦,在法律上不能列为安乐死对象。     

国外伊斯兰学者对于“安乐死”de看法

“安乐死”一词来自西方,原意为“无痛苦的、快乐的死亡”或“尊严的死亡”。现代医学对“安乐死”的实施分为“主动安乐死”和“被动安乐死”。“主动安乐死”,也称“积极安乐死”,是指医务人员或其他人在无法挽救病人生命的情况下采取措施主动结束病人的生命或加速病人的死亡的过程。“被动安乐死”,也称“消极安乐死”,是指终止维持病人生命的一切治疗措施,任其自然死亡。在一些西方国家,如:荷兰、瑞士已通过立法成为一种合法选择。在我国,虽然从1988年到现在关于“安乐死”议案一再有人提出,但一直未曾得到回应。当陕西第三印染厂职工、中国安乐死第一案当事人,同时也是安乐死第一人夏素文的儿子王明成于2003年8月3日去世,一场十几年来一直未曾停止过的话题——“安乐死”再掀波澜!我国穆斯林同样对此话题比较敏感,有反对的,也有支持的。现将“伊斯兰在线”阿语网站上(http://www.islamonline.net)刊登的、由著名学者穆罕默德·本·迈赫穆德·海瓦里撰写的一篇《穆斯林教法学家对于“安乐死”的看法》作简要地编译,便于我国穆斯林能对这一问题有一个清醒的认识,从而更加坚定自己的信念,理解伊斯兰教的伟大所在。     

Just How Unlawful is “Euthanasia”?

Those who campaign for law reform to permit "euthanasia" may seek different things and at least some of what they seek may already be permissible under the criminal law of England and Wales. In this paper I examine one means whereby the criminal law delivers outcomes acceptable to the euthanasia lobby, that is the curious notion of "causation" deployed by the law, which adds a value override to the more usual notion of factual causation such that, for example, if medical treatment falls within the acceptable range as normal and proper, the pre–existing injury or illness is treated as exclusively the cause of death and the doctor escapes criminal liability, even where the medical treatment will shorten life to the certain knowledge, possibly even the wish, of the doctor. Thus the law may already be delivering a range of outcomes — euthanasia in a weak sense — acceptable to the euthanasia lobby. If so, it achieves this by stealth. That is inappropriate to the doctor–patient relationship, which is one of trust. So there is a strong case for greater transparency. Moreover, there are limits to the acceptable outcomes which an unreformed criminal law can deliver and in a range of cases the criminal law condemns the doctor to impotence and the patient to a prolonged, miserable and undignified death. So there is also a case for going beyond the current law and legalising euthanasia in a strong sense.     

中国的安乐死观念与卫生保健

把在荷兰福利体制下狭义的安乐死概念移植到中国是不适当的.对于临终病人医疗上的缺陷不能用他们临终时的体面、尊严这一标准来衡量.这一问题的解决不是迅速地结束生命,而是要通过中国卫生医疗决策中的分配公正来提高生命的质量,需要建立一个跨国框架来讨论安乐死的特性与共性.     

After the slippery slope: Dutch experiences on regulating active euthanasia

"When a country legalizes active euthanasia, it puts itself on a slippery slope from where it may well go further downward." If true, this is a forceful argument in the battle of those who try to prevent euthanasia from becoming legal. The force of any slippery slope argument, however, is by definition limited by its reference to future developments which cannot empirically be sustained. Experience in the Netherlands--where a law regulating active euthanasia was accepted in April 2001--may shed light on the strengths as well as the weaknesses of the slippery slope argument in the context of the euthanasia debate. This paper consists of three parts. First, it clarifies the Dutch legislation on euthanasia and explains the cultural context in which it originated. Second, it looks at the argument of the slippery slope. A logical and an empirical version are distinguished, and the latter, though philosophically less interesting, proves to be most relevant in the discussion on euthanasia. Thirdly, it addresses the question whether Dutch experiences in the process of legalizing euthanasia justify the fear of the slippery slope. The conclusion is that Dutch experiences justify some caution.     

我国医药行业商业贿赂的立法缺陷与完善

分析了目前我国医药行业反商业贿赂立法在商业贿赂的范围、行贿主体、受贿主体、手段要件和主观要件等方面法律规定的缺陷。针对这些缺陷,分别提出了修改与完善的建议,对治理医药行业商业贿赂的立法与实践具有一定的理论意义和现实意义。     

Ending Life, Morality, and Meaning

Opponents of voluntary euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide often maintain that the procedures ought not to be accepted because ending an innocent human life would both be morally wrong in itself and have unfortunate consequences. A gravely suffering patient can grant that ending his life would involve such harm but still insist that he would have reason to continue living only if there were something to him in his abstaining from ending his life. Though relatively rarely, the notion of meaning of life has figured in recent medical ethical debate on voluntary euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. And in current philosophical discussion on meaning of life outside the medical ethical debate on voluntary euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide several authors have argued that being moral and having a meaningful existence are connected to each other. In this article, I assess whether his intentionally refraining from causing the harm related to voluntary euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide would involve something to such a patient in the sense that it would promote the meaningfulness of his life.     

Death in Our Life

This paper examines a central aspect of the relations between duration and quality of life by considering the moral right to voluntary euthanasia, and some aspects of the moral case for a legal right to euthanasia. Would widespread acceptance of a right to voluntary euthanasia lead to widespread changes in attitudes to life and death? Many of its advocates deny that, seeing it as a narrow right enabling people to avoid ending their life in great pain or total dependence, or a vegetative state. I argue that the right cannot cogently be conceived as a narrow right, confined to very limited circumstances. It is based on the value of having the normative power to choose the time and manner of one's death. Its recognition will be accompanied by far reaching changes in culture and attitudes, and these changes will enrich people's life by enabling them to integrate their death as part of their lives.     

Revisiting the problem of Jewish bioethics: the case of terminal care

This paper examines the main Jewish sources relevant to end-of-life ethics, two Talmudic stories, the early modern code of law (Shulhan Aruch), and contemporary Halakhaic (religious law) responsa. Some Orthodox rabbis object to the use of artificial life support that prolongs the life of a dying patient and permit its active discontinuation when the patient is suffering. Other rabbis believe that every medical measure must be taken in order to prolong life. The context of the discussion is the most recent release of the "Steinberg Report," which proposes a law regulating end-of-life issues in Israel. It is argued that the Orthodox rabbis base their views on a strongly positivist concept of religious law. The rabbis deliberate the law as a manifestation of the will of God and try to stretch the law as much as possible in order to benefit the patient, even when it is good for the patient to die. Direct and active actions that kill are prohibited; certain forms of passive euthanasia and contrivances that terminate life support without needing direct human action are accepted.     

日本安乐死立法之考察与研究

日本成文法律目前尚无关于安乐死的明确规定,但是一些典型的判例已经对安乐死合法的条件做出了界定。日本社会和民众绝大多数能够接受消极安乐死,但是强烈反对积极安乐死。积极安乐死属于日本刑法上的杀人罪行为,但是量刑较轻。     

安乐死立法为什么这样难

关于安乐死的争论由来已久,虽然目前全世界仅有荷兰等极少数国家通过了有关安乐死的法案,但安乐死实际已经在许多国家悄悄实施,越来越多的人对安乐死持肯定态度已成为不争的事实.贵州省贵阳市一个体行医者赵某还声称自己实施过几例"安乐死".我们实在不知道这种"违规"操作在现实中究竟有多少?这些事实提醒我们不应再就安乐死问题采取回避和视而不见的态度,而应正视它,并尽快制定出明确的法规,在认可安乐死的同时,规范安乐死的实施,作出符合人类理性的选择和符合人类法的精神决断.