Comparative and Critical Analysis of Key Eligibility Criteria for Voluntary Assisted Dying under Five Legal Frameworks

IF 1.2 Q1 LAW
B. White, Eliana Close, L. Willmott, Katrine Del Villar, J. Downie, J. Kevin Cameron, Jayne Hewitt, R. Meehan, Laura Ley Greaves
{"title":"Comparative and Critical Analysis of Key Eligibility Criteria for Voluntary Assisted Dying under Five Legal Frameworks","authors":"B. White, Eliana Close, L. Willmott, Katrine Del Villar, J. Downie, J. Kevin Cameron, Jayne Hewitt, R. Meehan, Laura Ley Greaves","doi":"10.53637/juwl9208","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Eligibility criteria determine a crucial question for all voluntary assisted dying frameworks: who can access assistance to die? This article undertakes a critical and comparative analysis of these criteria across five legal frameworks: existing laws in Victoria, Western Australia, Oregon and Canada, along with a model Bill for reform. Key aspects of these criteria analysed are capacity requirements; the nature of the medical condition that will qualify; and any required suffering. There are many similarities between the five models but there are also important differences which can have a significant impact on who can access voluntary assisted dying and when. Further, seemingly straightforward criteria can become complex in practice. The article concludes with the implications of this analysis for designing voluntary assisted dying regulation. Those implications include challenges of designing certain yet fair legislation and the need to evaluate voluntary assisted dying frameworks holistically to properly understand their operation.","PeriodicalId":45951,"journal":{"name":"UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LAW JOURNAL","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LAW JOURNAL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53637/juwl9208","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Eligibility criteria determine a crucial question for all voluntary assisted dying frameworks: who can access assistance to die? This article undertakes a critical and comparative analysis of these criteria across five legal frameworks: existing laws in Victoria, Western Australia, Oregon and Canada, along with a model Bill for reform. Key aspects of these criteria analysed are capacity requirements; the nature of the medical condition that will qualify; and any required suffering. There are many similarities between the five models but there are also important differences which can have a significant impact on who can access voluntary assisted dying and when. Further, seemingly straightforward criteria can become complex in practice. The article concludes with the implications of this analysis for designing voluntary assisted dying regulation. Those implications include challenges of designing certain yet fair legislation and the need to evaluate voluntary assisted dying frameworks holistically to properly understand their operation.
五种法律框架下自愿协助死亡关键资格标准的比较与批判分析
资格标准决定了所有自愿协助死亡框架的一个关键问题:谁可以获得死亡援助?本文对五个法律框架中的这些标准进行了批判性和比较分析:维多利亚州、西澳大利亚州、俄勒冈州和加拿大的现有法律,以及改革示范法案。所分析的这些标准的关键方面是能力要求;符合条件的医疗状况的性质;以及任何必要的痛苦。这五种模式有很多相似之处,但也有重要的差异,这可能会对谁可以以及何时获得自愿协助死亡产生重大影响。此外,看似简单的标准在实践中可能会变得复杂。文章最后指出了这一分析对设计自愿协助死亡法规的启示。这些影响包括设计某些但公平的立法的挑战,以及全面评估自愿协助死亡框架以正确理解其运作的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
25
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信