Abstract
National differences in end of life regulation are mirrored only partly in the attitudes of lay persons and influenced by the religious views and personal experiences of those being affected. Based on respect for autonomy, lay persons in non-religious groups in both countries argue for possibilities of euthanasia in severe cases, but caution against its possible misuse. National contrast was apparent in the moral reasoning of lay respondents concerning the distinction between withholding and withdrawing treatment. Modern religious lay persons in Israel argued strongly against allowing the withdrawal of treatment based on a patient’s wish, by referring to the halakhic tradition.
| Original language | American English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | SpringerBriefs in Ethics |
| Publisher | Springer Nature |
| Pages | 81-94 |
| Number of pages | 14 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 1 Jan 2016 |
Publication series
| Name | SpringerBriefs in Ethics |
|---|
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being
Keywords
- Active Euthanasia
- Advance Directive
- Assisted Suicide
- German Group
- Shared Decision Process
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Philosophy
- Medicine (miscellaneous)
- Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Lay Attitudes Towards End-of-Life Decision-Making in Germany and Israel'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver