header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
09 May 2019 / Charles Foster
Categories: Features , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Euthanasia, Ethics & Public Policy: An argument against legislation (Second Edition)

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
“A meticulous, highly readable, and profoundly disturbing examination of the merits of the slippery slope arguments”
  • Author: John Keown
  • Publisher: Cambridge University Press
  • ISBN: 9781107337909
  • Pages: 558
  • RRP: £31.99

Debates about ‘assisted dying’ (AD) (a sloppy, pejorative, but ubiquitous euphemism) always have two phases. First, there are the arguments of principle. The proponents of AD used to major on pain and suffering. It is immoral, they said, not to allow suffering to be terminated, even if that means death. One wouldn’t withhold such a mercy from your dog: why would you withhold it from your grandmother? With advances in palliative care, the rhetoric has changed, and the emphasis is now on autonomy: it’s my life: why shouldn’t I be able to end it when and in the circumstances I choose? Their opponents respond that intentional killing is always wrong, and that any derogation from that principle will be widely, deeply, and damagingly repercussive.

Then come arguments about the practicability of restricting AD to the circumstances in which the AD advocates say it should

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: No such thing as a ‘Welsh seat’
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
NLJ this week: Jury reform risks justice for efficiency’s sake
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
NLJ this week: Crypto fightback offers ‘new frontier for law’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
NLJ this week: Time to revive the duty to report crime?
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
NLJ this week: When are experts truly ‘necessary’?
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll