协助自杀条款的问责程度受到质疑。

Hospital ethics Pub Date : 1994-03-01
{"title":"协助自杀条款的问责程度受到质疑。","authors":"","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Michigan backs off from condemning Kevorkian while second thoughts emerge on both sides of the Atlantic over the Netherlands' narrowly passed euthanasia bill. All in all, however, the physician is still seen as the only appropriate agent for assisted suicide, as the following articles point out.</p>","PeriodicalId":79630,"journal":{"name":"Hospital ethics","volume":"10 2","pages":"1-4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1994-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Levels of accountability questioned in aid-in-suicide provisions.\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Michigan backs off from condemning Kevorkian while second thoughts emerge on both sides of the Atlantic over the Netherlands' narrowly passed euthanasia bill. All in all, however, the physician is still seen as the only appropriate agent for assisted suicide, as the following articles point out.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":79630,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hospital ethics\",\"volume\":\"10 2\",\"pages\":\"1-4\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1994-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hospital ethics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hospital ethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

密歇根州不再谴责凯沃基安,而大西洋两岸对荷兰勉强通过的安乐死法案都有了重新考虑。然而,总而言之,正如以下文章所指出的,医生仍然被视为协助自杀的唯一合适代理人。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Levels of accountability questioned in aid-in-suicide provisions.

Michigan backs off from condemning Kevorkian while second thoughts emerge on both sides of the Atlantic over the Netherlands' narrowly passed euthanasia bill. All in all, however, the physician is still seen as the only appropriate agent for assisted suicide, as the following articles point out.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信