But it is to recognize a special and appropriate concern about persons and groups seen as vulnerable because of impairment, disadvantage or stigmatisation. Of course, to observe that patients are members of potentially vulnerable groups is to assert neither that each such person or the group as a whole is actually vulnerable nor that people who are seriously or terminally ill but not considering physician‐assisted dying are not vulnerable. In short, slippery‐slope concerns about vulnerable patients confront both those who do and those who do not find physician‐assisted dying objectionable on moral grounds. They are also concerns for proponents of legalisation who assume that the risks for vulnerable patients are heightened if these practices remain underground, as well as for those who favour legalisation but fear that vulnerable patients will be denied a privilege reserved for better‐situated patients and that healthcare inequities already affecting vulnerable persons will be exacerbated. These are concerns both for those who oppose physician‐assisted dying on moral grounds and for those who support it but are uneasy about the possible social consequences of legalisation. These pressures would result, it is assumed, in heightened risk for physician‐assisted dying among vulnerable persons compared with background populations. Would accepting or legalising physician‐assisted dying at a patient's explicit request weigh more heavily on patients in vulnerable groups-the elderly, women, the uninsured, the poor, racial or ethnic minorities, people with disabilities, people with sometimes stigmatised illnesses like AIDS, and others? Would vulnerable patients be especially heavily targeted? Would these patients be pressured, manipulated, or forced to request or accept physician‐assisted dying by overburdened family members, callous physicians, or institutions or insurers concerned about their own profits? This slippery‐slope argument assumes that abusive pressures would operate on all seriously or terminally ill patients but would selectively disfavour patients whose capacities for decision making are impaired, who are subject to social prejudice or who may have been socially conditioned to think of themselves as less deserving of care. We must take these concerns seriously, not only because they are repeated so often but because they are of such gravity. LAWER, life‐ending acts without explicit current request PAS, physician‐assisted suicide SES, socioeconomic status. §Estimates based upon 2001 nationwide study also see Onwuteaka‐Philipsen et al, 2003. ¶Indirect data (via educational level and insuredness). ‡Estimate based upon prevalence study from early 1990s. †Referent is chronic lower respiratory disorder. Data are roughly comparable for entire period studied. *All estimates are based upon data about a sample of 9000 deaths from August to November 2005, unless indicated otherwise 2005 data are used for simplicity. No data to calculate denominator increased requests among cancer patients with depression probably rare for psychiatric illness as main diagnosis legal in Alzheimer disease with advance euthanasia directive but compliance rare Not legal no clear cases three disputed cases among those given prescription (n = 456) People with psychiatric illness, including depression and Alzheimer disease No data to calculate denominator probably 10 cases or fewer per yearġ.6% of all deaths of minors aged 1–16 yearsįindings based on inferential or partly contested data Not legal no cases reported or identified People with chronic physical or mental disabilities or chronic non‐terminal illnesses No data (Dutch mortality statistics are not kept by race) Indirect data (via SES) no direct relationship I have my car but its under my moms name and i want to know how much i gotta pay to transfer it to my name, because they told me i have to pay $400 for that.Netherlands*- PAS/euthanasia patients 2005 (n = 2400)įindings based on partly direct and partly inferential data do I have to get the title notarized before I sell it? Both parties live in AZ. What course of action do i have to take with DMV of NJ to have the title put in my name only and remove my parents. Secondly, the car is in another state with those tags. What happens when a title has two family names on it and one family member is deemed unable to drive because of health reasons. Is this car legally my daughter's car or does the title need to be notarized? ![]() My sister has given my oldest daughter her car as a gift.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |