| 摘要(英) |
Recently cancer disease becomes no1. of the top 10 reasons of death in Taiwan, by average one of the four patients’ death due to cancer. Terminal cancerous patients die tough, and exhausted with unbearable pain. When health medication doesn’t work to dying people, professionals suggest alleviating “care” instead. By the definition of The Alleviation Medication of Law, “terminal patient” means that patients getting serious disease, diagnosed cureless by their doctors, and proof in medicine tells the dying course in approaching is unavoidable. “Dying patient” presented in added laws means the one who is going to be death. However, in certain cases, pain caused by cancer disease can’t be diminished by endeavoring in care, so for several years claims of physician-assisted suicide have arisen everywhere.
Cause of medication useless, pain unresolvable, by the basis principle of respecting patients’ autonomy, this thesis will discuss the morality of physician-assisted suicide, on according to rights of nonmalevolence, beneficence, autonomy and informed consent. On ground of sympathizing patients’ suffering, physician-assisted suicide’s purpose is to end meaningless proceeding lives while patients actively ask, to respect patients’ autonomy. On the perspective of patients, everyone wants a “good death”, but some accidents are originally unresisted, otherwise death cause of diseases is always not a good result. Patients’ everyday living needs others’ help, under illness and medical techniques, shaped weak, and loses their individual dignity, life meanings. If “good death” compasses death of illness, then it can reach the degree that “good death” of more people will be available.
On the perspective of families, their biggest hope is to be accompanied with patients during their tough dying, nevertheless in the course of natural death, it is often hard to control the death time exactly. If the death planned, patients can perfectly arrange things and finish them completely, families otherwise can be accompanied with patients’ dying trips at that key moment.
However, because there are no pleasing support arguments in literature, until now it is still many fighting in physician-assisted suicide, but can’t proceed to legislation. Physician-assisted suicide means professionals help patients to suicide themselves, while voluntary active euthanasia concerns about second or third homicide so the morality of physician-assisted suicide gives priority to voluntary active euthanasia. Because the moral issue of voluntary active euthanasia concerning homicide, challenging the prohibition of “you must not kill”, therefore the condition is thorny in dealing with. In some kind of condition terminally cancerous patients don’t want be kept alive but die, supposed patients voluntarily ask at his free will, then physicians-assisted suicide can be justified? If it can’t be justified, then alleviation medication will be the only access, but if it can compass all the cases where morally only physician-assisted suicide can get rid of?
This thesis explores the morality of terminally cancerous patients’ physician-assisted suicide, giving all the possibilities of good or bad results caused by that, under fully informed consent, to suggest an entry to patients whose sufferings may not be decreased, and give a reference direction to the bioethics community. |
| 參考文獻 |
一.中文書籍：
丁庭宇主編，柯塞原著，黃瑞祺、張維安譯，1990，《古典社會學理論¬—馬克思、凃爾幹與韋伯》，台北：桂冠，二版，頁九十二-三。
王思迅主編，2002，《劍橋哲學辭典》，台北市：貓頭鷹出版：城邦文化發行，初版。
石世明，2001，《伴你最後一程：臨終關懷的愛與慈悲》，台北：天下遠見，初版。
李本富，2002，《醫學倫理學》，北京：北京大學醫學出版社，2版。
李瑞全主編，1998，《倫理與生死──亞洲應用倫理學論集》，中壢：國立中央大學，初版。
李瑞全，1999，《儒家生命倫理學》，台北市：鵝湖，初版。
邱仁宗，1988，《生死之間——道德難題與生命倫理》，台北市：中華，初版。
林火旺著，民88，《倫理學》，台北：五南，初版。
波伊曼著，江麗美譯，1997，《生與世──現代道德困境的挑戰》，台北：桂冠，初版。
波伊曼編著，楊植勝等譯，1997，《生世的抉擇──基本倫理學與墮胎》，台北：桂冠，初版。
波伊曼編著，陳瑞麟等譯，1997，《今生今世──生命的神聖、品質和意義》，台北：桂冠，初版。
波伊曼編著，魏德驥等譯，1997，《解構死亡──死亡、自殺、安樂死與死刑的剖析》，台北：桂冠，初版。
陳剛主編，黃應全著，1998，《生死之間》，北京：作家出版社，初版。
陶黎寶華、邱仁宗合編，1997，《價值與社會》，北京：中國社會學科出版社，初版。
傅偉勳，1993，《死亡的尊嚴與生命的尊嚴：從臨終精神醫學到現代生死學》，台北市：正中，初版。
趙可式，1992，《幽谷伴行》，台北：光啟出版社，初版。
Emiue Durkheim著，黃丘隆譯，1989，《自殺論》，台北：結構群文化，初版。
Marie de Hennezel著，吳美慧譯，2001，《我們並未互道再見：關於安樂死》，台北：張老師文化，初版。
Ronald Dworkin著，郭貞伶、陳雅汝譯， 2002，《生命的自主權》，台北：商周，初版。
二.中文論文：
王道仁、陳政忠等，1997，「安樂死是什麼？」，《當代醫學》第26卷，第6期。
中國科學技術協會，2004，「履行知情同意原則的指導意見」，《醫學與哲學雜誌》第25卷第9期。
邱仁宗，1998，「死亡和安樂死：概念和倫理問題」，《生命倫理學國際學術會議》。
林綺雲，1999，「我們需要安樂死嗎？」，《應用倫理研究通訊》第12期，中壢：國立中央大學哲學研究所應用倫理學研究室出版。
林憲，1999，「尊嚴死的思考」，《健康世界》，總期277。
李淑娟，1997，「自然死卅安樂死卅安寧照護」，《安寧照顧會訊》第26期。
李瑞全，1997，「安樂死的語意分析」，《應用倫理研究通訊》第4期，中壢：國立中央大學哲學研究所應用倫理學研究室出版。
李瑞全，1999，「儒家論安樂死」，《應用倫理研究通訊》第12期，中壢：國立中央大學哲學研究所應用倫理學研究室出版。
李瑞全，2003，「倫理諮詢理論與模式」，《應用倫理研究通訊》第25期，中壢：國立中央大學哲學研究所應用倫理學研究室出版。
周勵志，1998，「音樂治療與臨終關懷」，《應用倫理研究通訊》第8期，中壢：國立中央大學哲學研究所應用倫理學研究室出版。
范瑞平主編，1998，「安樂死」，《中外醫學哲學》第1卷第1期。
孫效智，1997，「安樂死的倫理省思」，《哲學雜誌》第19期。
時國明，2002，「打開潘朵拉的盒子—安樂死在荷蘭」，《應用倫理研究通訊》第22期，中壢：國立中央大學哲學研究所應用倫理學研究室出版。
陳瑞崇，1998，「誰的身體在說話？論安樂死立法之惡」，《東吳政治學報》第9期。
陳榮基，1998，「臨終關懷與安寧療護」，《應用倫理研究通訊》第8期，中壢：國立中央大學哲學研究所應用倫理學研究室出版。
許禮安，1998，「臨終關懷之我見」，《應用倫理研究通訊》第8期，中壢：國立中央大學哲學研究所應用倫理學研究室出版。
楊樹同，1997，「論安樂死」，《應用哲學與文化治療學術研討會論文集》，中央大學哲研所編。
趙可式、賴允亮、葉炳強，1998，「劃安樂死與清自然死的界限」，《安寧照顧會訊》第22期。
趙可式，1996，「臨終病人照護的倫理與法律問題」，《護理雜誌》第43卷第1期。
廖洪彬、車小瀕，2002，「試析『安樂死是一種以生命品質為依歸，對死亡狀態自主，所主張的權利』」，《應用倫理研究通訊》第23期，中壢：國立中央大學哲學研究所應用倫理學研究室出版。
劉久清，1999，「論自主性與安樂死」，《應用倫理研究通訊》第12期，中壢：國立中央大學哲學研究所應用倫理學研究室出版。
蔡昌雄，1999，「科技理性vs.精神靈性：試析當代臨終關懷運動的內在難題」，《應用倫理研究通訊》第9期，中壢：國立中央大學哲學研究所應用倫理學研究室出版。
謝文祥，1998，「急救治療與維生治療」，《應用倫理研究通訊》第7期，中壢：國立中央大學哲學研究所應用倫理學研究室出版。
謝文祥，1999，「從Jack 的案例談安寧照顧與安樂死」，《應用倫理研究通訊》第12期，中壢：國立中央大學哲學研究所應用倫理學研究室出版。
戴宇光，1999，「臨終病人自律與自主權的探討」，國立中央大學哲學研究所碩士論文。
顏厥安，1998，「生命的意義不必然再繼續活下去」，《當代》第126期。
羅秉祥，1998，「儒家的生死價值觀與安樂死」，《中外醫學哲學》第1卷第1期。
三.英文書籍：
Beauchamp, Tom L.＆Childress, James F., 2001, Principles of Biomedical Ethics, New York: Oxford University Press, Inc., 5th ed..
Beauchamp, Tom L.＆ Walters, LeRoy, 1999, Contemporary Issues in Bioethics, U. S. A.: W.P. Co., 5th ed..
Beauchamp, Tom L.＆ Walters, LeRoy, 2003, Contemporary Issues in Bioethics, U. S. A.: W.P. Co., 6th ed..
Glover, Jonathan, 1977, Causing Death and Saving Lives, Penguin Group, 1th ed..
Quill, Timothy E, 1993, Death and Dignity: Making Choices and Taking Charge, New York: W.W. Norton & Company.
Singer, Peter, 1999, Practical Ethics, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2nd ed..
Uhlmann , Michael M., 1998, Last Rights?: Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia Debated, Ethics and Public Policy Center and Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1th ed..
四.英文論文：
American Hospice Association, 1992, “A Patient’s Bill of Rights”, in Tom L. Beauchamp＆LeRoy Walters, Contemporary Issues in Bioethics (1), 1999, U. S. A.: W.P. Co., 5th ed., p. 70-1.
Arkes, Hadley V., 1998, “The Right to Die-Again”, in Michael M. Uhlmann, Last Rights? : Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia Debated, 1998, Washington, D.C.: Ethics and Public Policy Center publish, 15th ed.., p. 95-110.
Battin, Margaret Pabst, 1995, “Ethical Issues in Physician-Assisted Suicide”, in Michael M. Uhlmann, Last Rights?: Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia Debated, 1998, Washington, D.C.: Ethics and Public Policy Center publish, 15th ed.., p. 130.
Brock, Dan W., 1992, “Voluntary Active Euthanasia”, in Tom L. Beauchamp＆LeRoy Walters, Contemporary Issues in Bioethics, 1999, U. S. A.: W.P. Co., 5th ed., pp. 296-305.
Dworkin, Ronald, 1998, “Do We Have a Right to Die?”, in Michael M. Uhlmann, Last Rights? : Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia Debated, 1998, Washington, D.C.: Ethics and Public Policy Center publish, 15th ed.., p. 75-93.
Kamm, F. M., 2002, “A Right to Choose Death”, in Tom L. Beauchamp＆LeRoy Walters, Contemporary Issues in Bioethics, 2003, U. S. A.: W.P. Co., 6th ed.., p. 186-91.
Kass, Leon R., 1990, “Death with Dignity and the Sanctity of Life”, in Michael M. Uhlmann, Last Rights?: Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia Debated, 1998, Washington, D.C.: Ethics and Public Policy Center publish, 15th ed.., p. 201.
Kass, Leon R., 1992, “Why Doctor Must Not Kill”, in Michael M. Uhlmann, Last Rights? : Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia Debated, 1998, Washington, D.C.: Ethics and Public Policy Center publish, 15th ed.., p. 300.
Kass, Leon R., 1993, “Is There a Right to Die?”, in Tom L. Beauchamp＆LeRoy Walters, Contemporary Issues in Bioethics (1), 2003 , U. S. A.: W.P. Co., 6th ed., p. 195.
Noonan, John, 1995, “Three Court Decisions: A. Compassion in Dying v. State of Washington”, in Michael M. Uhlmann, Last Rights? : Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia Debated, 1998, Washington, D.C.: Ethics and Public Policy Center publish, 15th ed.., p. 475-83.
Paul II, John, 1995, “The Gospel of Life”, in Michael M. Uhlmann, Last Rights? : Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia Debated, 1998, Washington, D.C.: Ethics and Public Policy Center publish, 15th ed.., p. 225-6.
Quill, Timothy E., 1993, “Death and Dignity: B. Potential Clinical Criteria for Physician-Assisted Suicide”, in Michael M. Uhlmann, Last Rights? : Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia Debated, 1998, Washington, D.C.: Ethics and Public Policy Center publish, 15th ed.., p. 327.
Rachels, James, 1982, “Active and Passive Euthanasia”, Moral Issues, Oxford University.
Reinhardt, Stephen, 1996, “Three Court Decisions: B. Compassion in Dying v. State of Washington”,in Michael M. Uhlmann, Last Rights? : Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia Debated, 1998, Washington, D.C.: Ethics and Public Policy Center publish, 15th ed.., p. 495.
Singer, Peter, 1955, “Rethinking Life and Death: A New Ethical Approach”, in Michael M. Uhlmann, Last Rights? : Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia Debated, 1998, Washington, D.C.: Ethics and Public Policy Center publish, 15th ed.., p. 195-6.
Thomasma, David C., 1996, “When Physicians Choose to Participate in the Death of Their Patients”, in Tom L. Beauchamp＆LeRoy Walters, Contemporary Issues in Bioethics (1), 1999, U. S. A.: W.P. Co., 5th ed.., p. 309-12.
五.網路資料：
安寧緩和醫療條例第三條，參見http://www.hospice.org.tw/relax/list.htm.
「安寧照顧基金會」網路資料http://www.hospice.org.tw/research/right_hospital.asp.
孫效智著，〈安樂死的倫理反省〉，http://ccsun.57cc.ntu.edu.tw/~johannes. |
[Endnote RIS 格式]
[相關文章]
[文章引用]
[完整記錄]
[館藏目錄]
[檢視]
plurk
funp
live
udn
HD
myshare
netvibes
friend
youpush
delicious
baidu
Google bookmarks
del.icio.us
hemidemi
facebook
twitter
google
reddit