-
- Malcolm Parker.
- J Law Med. 2015 Mar 1;22(3):526-33.
AbstractRichard Huxtable has recently argued that while assisted dying has been both repeatedly condemned and commended, a compromise resolution is possible. Following critique of other purported solutions, he argues for a new legal offence of "compassionate killing" as a plausible compromise between supporters and opponents of legalised assisted dying, because it offers something of significance to both sides. However, it turns out that "compassionate killing" would leave both sides with insufficient net benefit for the proposal to qualify as a compromise between them. By analogy with another apparently intractable bioethical debate, concerning destructive embryo research, this column rejects Huxtable's solution as another "Clayton's compromise". True compromise is not possible in bioethical debates involving divisions over deeply held values and world views. Resolving such debates inevitably involves the substitution of one dominant world view with another.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*,_underline_or**bold**. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>and subscript<sub>text</sub>. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3., hyphens-or asterisks*. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com) - Images can be included with:
 - For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote..