ATTITUDE OF DOCTORS TOWARDS EUTHANASIA

Background- Those who are pro euthanasia believe that such act eliminates the patient's pain and suffering. Right to die allows the person to die with dignity. But euthanasia may involve taking a human's life, The present study evaluates the attitude of doctors involved in care of critically ill patients towards euthanasia. Material & methods- A survey on Euthanasia was conducted amongst 100 doctors involved in the treatment of critically ill patients of various ailments at ICARE institute of Medical Sciences & Research Centre & B.C.Roy Hospital, Haldia, West Bengal, India, to ?nd out their attitude towards euthanasia. In present study, majority i.e., 64 (64%) subjects were between 31-40 years, Results- 24 (24%) subjects were between 41-50 years, 10 (10%) subjects were between 51-60 years while 2 (2%) subjects were more than 60 years. 56(28%) subjects were females while 44 (44%) subjects were males. 4 (4%) were Neurophysician, 5 (5%) were Neurosurgeon, 32 (32%) were Critical care consultant, 19 (19%) were Anesthetist, 34 (34%) were, 6 (6%) were Surgeon. 89 (89%) (81.2-94.4%, 95%CI) subjects were anti-euthanasia. In majority of circumstances, 89 (89%) subjects said they will not give euthanasia while 11 (11%) (5.6-18.8%, 95%CI) subjects said they will give euthanasia. Though the Supreme Court Conclusion- judgement has provided a major boost, it is a long way to go before it becomes a law. Also, its misuse remains a major issue.

Aporías entre pluralismo y justicia en la legalización de la eutanasia en Colombia / Aporias between pluralism and justice in the legalization of euthanasia in Colombia / Aporias entre o pluralismo e a justiça na legalização da eutanásia na Colômbia

Este artículo propone reflexionar sobre la dificultad de determinar la reivindicación del derecho a morir con dignidad en la forma de eutanasia. Se discuten los conflictos éticos que surgen al ser defendido este derecho en aquellas personas que son incapaces de brindar su consentimiento de manera directa ­por su edad o condición­ y lo hacen a través de la figura ética y jurídica del "consentimiento por sustitución". Se analizan cuatro valores que suelen estar en conflicto en estos casos: entre quienes propenden por extremar las medidas terapéuticas ­aplicar una tecnología para postergar la muerte­ en oposición a quienes consideran que lo mejor sería suspender dichas medidas ­permitir el desenlace natural de la muerte­; entre quienes reclaman ser escuchados en calidad de sustitutos ­libertad­, frente a quienes atribuyen una serie de consecuencias desafortunadas si se respeta esta solicitud y consideran que lo justo sería hacer un control social al respecto ­justicia­. Las tesis para dar solución a tales conflictos son controvertibles y contradictorias en su raciocinio. Se plantea una aproximación metodológica para resolver esta aporía mediante la comprensión de los valores en conflicto y el intercambio que puede hacerse entre ellos. Con esto en mente, se propone una perspectiva bioética sustentada en capacidades críticas de origen dialéctico.

This article suggests reflecting on the difficulty to determine the assertion of the right to die with dignity through euthanasia. It discusses the ethical conflicts that arise when defending this right for those people that are unable to give their consent directly ­due to their age or condition­ and they do so by the ethical and legal figure of "consent by substitution". Four values that are often in conflict in such cases are analyzed: between those who favor the ultimate therapeutic measures ­the use of technology to delay death­ as opposed to those who consider that it would be best to suspend such measures ­allow the natural outcome of death­; between those who demand to be heard as substitutes ­freedom­ against those who claim there would be a of unfortunate consequences if this request is granted and consider it to be fair to exercise social control in this respect ­justice­. The reasoning behind the theses to solve such conflicts are both controversial and contradictory. To settle this aporia, a methodological approach is proposed to understand the conflicting values, as well as the exchange that can be made between them. With this in mind, a bioethical perspective based on critical abilities of dialectical origin is proposed.

Este artigo propõe uma reflexão sobre a dificuldade de determinar a reivindicação do direito a morrer com dignidade sob a forma de eutanásia. São discutidos os conflitos éticos que surgem ao defender-se este direito para aquelas pessoas que são incapazes de dar seu consentimento de maneira direta ­ por sua idade ou condição ­ e o fazem por meio da figura ética e jurídica do "consentimento por substituição". São analisados quatro valores que costumam estar em conflito nestes casos: entre aqueles que tendem por maximizar as medidas terapêuticas ­fazer uso da tecnologia para postergar a morte­ em oposição àqueles que consideram que o melhor seria suspender tais medidas ­permitir o desenlace natural da morte­; entre aqueles que reivindicam ser escutados na qualidade de substitutos ­liberdade­ frente àqueles que atribuem uma série de consequências infelizes ao respeitar-se esta solicitação e consideram que o justo seria fazer um controle social sobre o assunto ­justiça­. As teses que buscam soluções para tais conflitos são controvertíveis e contraditórias em seu raciocínio. Sugere-se uma aproximação metodológica para resolver esta aporia mediante a compreensão dos valores em conflito e o intercambio que se pode fazer entre eles. Com isto em mente, se propõe uma perspectiva bioética sustentada em capacidades críticas de origem dialética.