Iranian Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine

Mendeley  

Zotero  

Hosseini S A R, Zareian D. Suffering from Illness and Euthanasia sentence. IJMEHM 2020; 13 :289-305
URL: http://ijme.tums.ac.ir/article-1-6106-en.html

Perhaps, the most appropriate translation proposed for euthanasia is the painless and piteous killing. According to the existence of effective components in committing a crime, it is considered as complicity in murder and the consent of victim does not affect the nature of criminal act and the criminal liability of person depriving the life. One of issues related to this killing which is disagreed is the edict that person who is obliged to save life related to passive type of euthanasia does not perform this killing and there must be difference among its different types and conditions. The primary reasoning of the edicts indicate that duties whether difficulty or not must be done but, according to the rule of negation of difficulty and hardship, obligation to these edicts in cases of hardship is cancelled. The articles of this rule include obligatory duties to disuse. However, from the view of jurists, it is not general that euthanasia corresponds to some juridical sub-principles indicating the permission of suicide in some conditions, although this is criticized and rejected. Two rules of hardship and beneficence are those believed to help prove the hypothesis by attaching to the rule of negation of hardship and difficulty. But, it is clear that it is not so. In feasibility study of this rule with the rule of no harm, they are proved by the murder illegality and the mentioned rules cannot govern the primary reasoning of depriving the life Therefore, euthanasia is not allowed at all.