dignitas.pdf
Contrary to the common constriction of the euthanasia-discussion on “self-determination at the end of life" Eva Schumann claims rethinking in dealing with seriously ill and dying people. To meet their needs in her view a comprehensive access to outpatient and inpatient palliative care facilitie...
| Γλώσσα: | ger |
|---|---|
| Έκδοση: |
Universitätsverlag Göttingen
2020
|
| id |
oapen-20.500.12657-36889 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
dspace |
| spelling |
oapen-20.500.12657-368892021-03-25T20:15:21Z Dignitas Schumann, Eva law euthanasia geriatric welfare bic Book Industry Communication::L Law bic Book Industry Communication::J Society & social sciences::JF Society & culture: general::JFM Ethical issues & debates::JFME Ethical issues: euthanasia & right to die bic Book Industry Communication::L Law::LN Laws of Specific jurisdictions::LNF Criminal law & procedure Contrary to the common constriction of the euthanasia-discussion on “self-determination at the end of life" Eva Schumann claims rethinking in dealing with seriously ill and dying people. To meet their needs in her view a comprehensive access to outpatient and inpatient palliative care facilities is recquired and also improvements of care in nursing homes as well as offers to improve the integration of members into care. These claims conclude the discussion between assistance in dying (indirect euthanasia), and assistance to die (active and passive euthanasia). Taking account historical, interdisciplinary and comparative law issues it is demonstrated that the formal legal distinction between the various case groups of euthanasia not sufficiently takes into account the social dimension of dying. 2020-04-15T02:30:24Z 2020-04-15T02:30:24Z 2006 book book http://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/36889 ger application/pdf n/a dignitas.pdf Universitätsverlag Göttingen 10.17875/gup2006-21 10.17875/gup2006-21 ffaff15c-73ed-45cd-8be1-56a881b51f62 open access |
| institution |
OAPEN |
| collection |
DSpace |
| language |
ger |
| description |
Contrary to the common constriction of the euthanasia-discussion on “self-determination at the end of life" Eva Schumann claims rethinking in dealing with seriously ill and dying people. To meet their needs in her view a comprehensive access to outpatient and inpatient palliative care facilities is recquired and also improvements of care in nursing homes as well as offers to improve the integration of members into care. These claims conclude the discussion between assistance in dying (indirect euthanasia), and assistance to die (active and passive euthanasia). Taking account historical, interdisciplinary and comparative law issues it is demonstrated that the formal legal distinction between the various case groups of euthanasia not sufficiently takes into account the social dimension of dying. |
| title |
dignitas.pdf |
| spellingShingle |
dignitas.pdf |
| title_short |
dignitas.pdf |
| title_full |
dignitas.pdf |
| title_fullStr |
dignitas.pdf |
| title_full_unstemmed |
dignitas.pdf |
| title_sort |
dignitas.pdf |
| publisher |
Universitätsverlag Göttingen |
| publishDate |
2020 |
| _version_ |
1771297427847905281 |
