Abstract
The achievements of modern medicine are manifold and impressive. However, there is a broad recognition of the fact that continuing medical treatment is not always beneficial to the patient, nor is it always what the patient wants. This has led to a debate about the way physicians may or may not be involved in the end of life of patients. Could there be a justification for the active ending of a patient's life? This debate has a global character. In this article we will explore this debate for developing countries; we will focus on physician-assisted death (PAD) in Latin American countries. At stake is the moral relevance of differences, not the moral justification of PAD per se. We argue that arguments for PAD apply equally in affluent and in developing countries. Some of the counterarguments, however, would seem to hold more in developing countries than in affluent countries. Yet, under certain conditions, a Policy tolerating PAD would be as acceptable in developing countries as in developed countries.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
