StranshamFord v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others: Can active voluntary euthanasia and doctorassisted suicide be legally justified and are they consistent with the biomedical ethical principles Some suggested guidelines for doct

The recent case of Stransham-Ford v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others held that voluntary active euthanasia and doctor assisted suicide may be legally justified in certain circumstances. The court observed that the distinction between ‘active’ and ‘passive’ voluntary e...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: David McQuoid-Mason
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Health and Medical Publishing Group 2015-11-01
Series:South African Journal of Bioethics and Law
Online Access:http://www.sajbl.org.za/index.php/sajbl/article/download/446/441
id doaj-1c1aa7a468f1474c9b1728d9aaf7e257
record_format Article
spelling doaj-1c1aa7a468f1474c9b1728d9aaf7e2572020-11-25T00:28:05ZengHealth and Medical Publishing GroupSouth African Journal of Bioethics and Law1999-76392015-11-0182344010.7196/SAJBL.446StranshamFord v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others: Can active voluntary euthanasia and doctorassisted suicide be legally justified and are they consistent with the biomedical ethical principles Some suggested guidelines for doctDavid McQuoid-MasonThe recent case of Stransham-Ford v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others held that voluntary active euthanasia and doctor assisted suicide may be legally justified in certain circumstances. The court observed that the distinction between ‘active’ and ‘passive’ voluntary euthanasia is not legally tenable as in both instances the doctors concerned have the ‘actual’ or ‘eventual’ intention to terminate the patient’s life and have caused or hastened the patient’s death. It is argued that as the South African Constitution is the supreme law of the country, the fundamental rights of patients guaranteed in the Constitution cannot be undermined by ethical duties imposed on health care practitioners by international and national professional bodies. The court in the Stransham-Ford case did not use ethical theories and principles to decide the matter. It simply applied the values in the Constitution and the provisions of the Bill of Rights. However, in order to assist medical practitioners with practical guidelines with which many of them are familiar - rather than complicated unfamiliar philosophical arguments - the biomedical ethical principles of patient autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice or fairness are applied to active voluntary euthanasia and doctor-assisted suicide in the context of the Stransham-Ford case. Although the case has not set a precedent or opened the floodgates to doctor-assisted voluntary active euthanasia and it is open to Parliament, the Constitutional Court or other courts to develop the concept or outlaw it, some guidelines are offered for doctors to consider should they be authorized by a court to assist with voluntary active euthanasia.http://www.sajbl.org.za/index.php/sajbl/article/download/446/441
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author David McQuoid-Mason
spellingShingle David McQuoid-Mason
StranshamFord v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others: Can active voluntary euthanasia and doctorassisted suicide be legally justified and are they consistent with the biomedical ethical principles Some suggested guidelines for doct
South African Journal of Bioethics and Law
author_facet David McQuoid-Mason
author_sort David McQuoid-Mason
title StranshamFord v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others: Can active voluntary euthanasia and doctorassisted suicide be legally justified and are they consistent with the biomedical ethical principles Some suggested guidelines for doct
title_short StranshamFord v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others: Can active voluntary euthanasia and doctorassisted suicide be legally justified and are they consistent with the biomedical ethical principles Some suggested guidelines for doct
title_full StranshamFord v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others: Can active voluntary euthanasia and doctorassisted suicide be legally justified and are they consistent with the biomedical ethical principles Some suggested guidelines for doct
title_fullStr StranshamFord v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others: Can active voluntary euthanasia and doctorassisted suicide be legally justified and are they consistent with the biomedical ethical principles Some suggested guidelines for doct
title_full_unstemmed StranshamFord v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others: Can active voluntary euthanasia and doctorassisted suicide be legally justified and are they consistent with the biomedical ethical principles Some suggested guidelines for doct
title_sort stranshamford v minister of justice and correctional services and others: can active voluntary euthanasia and doctorassisted suicide be legally justified and are they consistent with the biomedical ethical principles some suggested guidelines for doct
publisher Health and Medical Publishing Group
series South African Journal of Bioethics and Law
issn 1999-7639
publishDate 2015-11-01
description The recent case of Stransham-Ford v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others held that voluntary active euthanasia and doctor assisted suicide may be legally justified in certain circumstances. The court observed that the distinction between ‘active’ and ‘passive’ voluntary euthanasia is not legally tenable as in both instances the doctors concerned have the ‘actual’ or ‘eventual’ intention to terminate the patient’s life and have caused or hastened the patient’s death. It is argued that as the South African Constitution is the supreme law of the country, the fundamental rights of patients guaranteed in the Constitution cannot be undermined by ethical duties imposed on health care practitioners by international and national professional bodies. The court in the Stransham-Ford case did not use ethical theories and principles to decide the matter. It simply applied the values in the Constitution and the provisions of the Bill of Rights. However, in order to assist medical practitioners with practical guidelines with which many of them are familiar - rather than complicated unfamiliar philosophical arguments - the biomedical ethical principles of patient autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice or fairness are applied to active voluntary euthanasia and doctor-assisted suicide in the context of the Stransham-Ford case. Although the case has not set a precedent or opened the floodgates to doctor-assisted voluntary active euthanasia and it is open to Parliament, the Constitutional Court or other courts to develop the concept or outlaw it, some guidelines are offered for doctors to consider should they be authorized by a court to assist with voluntary active euthanasia.
url http://www.sajbl.org.za/index.php/sajbl/article/download/446/441
work_keys_str_mv AT davidmcquoidmason stranshamfordvministerofjusticeandcorrectionalservicesandotherscanactivevoluntaryeuthanasiaanddoctorassistedsuicidebelegallyjustifiedandaretheyconsistentwiththebiomedicalethicalprinciplessomesuggestedguidelinesfordoct
_version_ 1725336920877170688