9780792351863 - Asking to Die: Inside the Dutch Debate about Euthanasia de Ciesielski-Carlucci, C.; Kimsma, G. L; Kushner, Thomasine Kimbrough; Thomasma, David C. (12 resultados)

Condición: New. In.

Condición: New.

Condición: New. In the Netherlands, euthanasia is legal, and doctors can openly and intentionally end the life of their patients. This book addresses the debate among Dutch physicians, policy-makers, lawyers, and bioethicists, as well as families, using academic papers as well as personal experiences. Editor(s): Thomasma, David C.; Kushner, Thomasine; Kimsma, G.L. (Free University Amsterdam, Medical Faculty, The Netherlands); Ciesielski-Carlucci, C. Num Pages: 588 pages, biography. BIC Classification: 1DDN; HPQ; MBDC. Category: (P) Professional & Vocational; (UP) Postgraduate, Research & Scholarly; (UU) Undergraduate. Dimension: 195 x 281 x 35. Weight in Grams: 1108. . 1998. Paperback. . . . .

Taschenbuch. Condición: Neu. Asking to Die: Inside the Dutch Debate about Euthanasia | David C. Thomasma (u. a.) | Taschenbuch | xx | Englisch | 1998 | Springer | EAN 9780792351863 | Verantwortliche Person für die EU: Springer Verlag GmbH, Tiergartenstr. 17, 69121 Heidelberg, juergen[dot]hartmann[at]springer[dot]com | Anbieter: preigu.

Condición: New. pp. 608.

Condición: New. In the Netherlands, euthanasia is legal, and doctors can openly and intentionally end the life of their patients. This book addresses the debate among Dutch physicians, policy-makers, lawyers, and bioethicists, as well as families, using academic papers as well as personal experiences. Editor(s): Thomasma, David C.; Kushner, Thomasine; Kimsma, G.L. (Free University Amsterdam, Medical Faculty, The Netherlands); Ciesielski-Carlucci, C. Num Pages: 588 pages, biography. BIC Classification: 1DDN; HPQ; MBDC. Category: (P) Professional & Vocational; (UP) Postgraduate, Research & Scholarly; (UU) Undergraduate. Dimension: 195 x 281 x 35. Weight in Grams: 1108. . 1998. Paperback. . . . . Books ship from the US and Ireland.

Taschenbuch. Condición: Neu. Druck auf Anfrage Neuware - Printed after ordering - claim was that he had faced a conflict of duties pitting his legal duty not to kill against his duty as a physician to relieve his patient's unbearable suffering. He was acquitted on the important grounds of conflict of duty. These grounds are based on a concept in Dutch law called 'force majeure' 4 which recognizes extenuating circumstances such as conflicts of duty. The acquittal was upheld by the Lower Court of Alkmaar, but revoked by an Amsterdam court of appeal. The case went on to the Supreme Court, but before the Supreme Court's decision was issued, the Royal Dutch Medical Association (RDMA) attempted to clarify the criteria for euthanasia that many within the profession already accepted. The RDMA proposed that physicians be permitted to perform euthanasia provided that a set of procedures had been met. Variously stated, the guidelines contain the following central provisions: Voluntary, competent, explicit, and persistent requests on the part of the - patient; Requests based on full information; - The patient is in a situation of intolerable and hopeless suffering (either - physical or mental); No further acceptable alternatives to euthanasia. All alternatives - acceptable to the patient for relief of suffering having been tried; Consultation with at least one other physician whose judgment can be - 5 expected to be independent. Indirectly, these guidelines became the criteria prosecutors used to decide whether or not to bring charges.

Paperback. Condición: Like New. Like New. book.

Taschenbuch. Condición: Neu. This item is printed on demand - it takes 3-4 days longer - Neuware -claim was that he had faced a conflict of duties pitting his legal duty not to kill against his duty as a physician to relieve his patient's unbearable suffering. He was acquitted on the important grounds of conflict of duty. These grounds are based on a concept in Dutch law called 'force majeure' 4 which recognizes extenuating circumstances such as conflicts of duty. The acquittal was upheld by the Lower Court of Alkmaar, but revoked by an Amsterdam court of appeal. The case went on to the Supreme Court, but before the Supreme Court's decision was issued, the Royal Dutch Medical Association (RDMA) attempted to clarify the criteria for euthanasia that many within the profession already accepted. The RDMA proposed that physicians be permitted to perform euthanasia provided that a set of procedures had been met. Variously stated, the guidelines contain the following central provisions: Voluntary, competent, explicit, and persistent requests on the part of the - patient; Requests based on full information; - The patient is in a situation of intolerable and hopeless suffering (either - physical or mental); No further acceptable alternatives to euthanasia. All alternatives - acceptable to the patient for relief of suffering having been tried; Consultation with at least one other physician whose judgment can be - 5 expected to be independent. Indirectly, these guidelines became the criteria prosecutors used to decide whether or not to bring charges. 604 pp. Englisch.

Taschenbuch. Condición: Neu. This item is printed on demand - Print on Demand Titel. Neuware -claim was that he had faced a conflict of duties pitting his legal duty not to kill against his duty as a physician to relieve his patient¿s unbearable suffering. He was acquitted on the important grounds of conflict of duty. These grounds are based on a concept in Dutch law called 'force majeure' 4 which recognizes extenuating circumstances such as conflicts of duty. The acquittal was upheld by the Lower Court of Alkmaar, but revoked by an Amsterdam court of appeal. The case went on to the Supreme Court, but before the Supreme Court's decision was issued, the Royal Dutch Medical Association (RDMA) attempted to clarify the criteria for euthanasia that many within the profession already accepted. The RDMA proposed that physicians be permitted to perform euthanasia provided that a set of procedures had been met. Variously stated, the guidelines contain the following central provisions: Voluntary, competent, explicit, and persistent requests on the part of the ¿ patient; Requests based on full information; ¿ The patient is in a situation of intolerable and hopeless suffering (either ¿ physical or mental); No further acceptable alternatives to euthanasia. All alternatives ¿ acceptable to the patient for relief of suffering having been tried; Consultation with at least one other physician whose judgment can be ¿ 5 expected to be independent. Indirectly, these guidelines became the criteria prosecutors used to decide whether or not to bring charges.Springer-Verlag GmbH, Tiergartenstr. 17, 69121 Heidelberg 604 pp. Englisch.

Condición: New. Print on Demand pp. 608 66:B&W 7 x 10 in or 254 x 178 mm Perfect Bound on White w/Gloss Lam.

Condición: New. PRINT ON DEMAND pp. 608.