Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
End of Life ChoicesConsensus and controversy$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Fiona Randall and Robin Downie

Print publication date: 2009

Print ISBN-13: 9780199547333

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: November 2011

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199547333.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2019. All Rights Reserved. An individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use. date: 18 October 2019

Three logical distinctions in decision-making

Three logical distinctions in decision-making

Chapter:
(p.49) 3 Three logical distinctions in decision-making
Source:
End of Life Choices
Author(s):

Fiona Randall

R. S. Downie (Contributor Webpage)

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199547333.003.0003

This chapter examines the three logical distinctions with ethical significance which are of considerable importance in clinical decision-making in end of life care. They are the distinctions between intending and foreseeing a consequence, between acts and omissions, and between killing and letting die. Analysis reveals that while letting die is permitted in certain circumstances, killing is prohibited.

Keywords:   consequences, foresight, acts, omissions, letting die, killing, medical ethics

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .