header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

Euthanasia, Ethics & Public Policy: An argument against legislation (Second Edition)

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
09 May 2019 / Charles Foster
Categories: Features , Human rights
printer mail-detail
“A meticulous, highly readable, and profoundly disturbing examination of the merits of the slippery slope arguments”
  • Author: John Keown
  • Publisher: Cambridge University Press
  • ISBN: 9781107337909
  • Pages: 558
  • RRP: £31.99

Debates about ‘assisted dying’ (AD) (a sloppy, pejorative, but ubiquitous euphemism) always have two phases. First, there are the arguments of principle. The proponents of AD used to major on pain and suffering. It is immoral, they said, not to allow suffering to be terminated, even if that means death. One wouldn’t withhold such a mercy from your dog: why would you withhold it from your grandmother? With advances in palliative care, the rhetoric has changed, and the emphasis is now on autonomy: it’s my life: why shouldn’t I be able to end it when and in the circumstances I choose? Their opponents respond that intentional killing is always wrong, and that any derogation from that principle will be widely, deeply, and damagingly repercussive.

Then come arguments about the practicability of restricting AD to the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Cyber drills build real-world resilience
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: Fairness from day one
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
NLJ this week: When procedure is power
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
NLJ this week: Jury still trusted—Crown Court study revisited
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
NLJ this week: AI copyright clash
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll