Euthanasia: In Defense of A Good, Ancient Word
- *Corresponding Author:
- Dr.Dragan Pavlovic
Klinik und Poliklinik für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin
Ernst-Moritz-Arndt Universität, Friedrich- Loeffler-Strasse 23b
17487 Greifswald, Germany
Tel: 49383486 5848
Fax: 49 3834 86 80104
E-mail: [email protected]
Received date: November 25, 2010; Accepted date: December 23, 2010; Published date: January 03, 2011
Citation: Pavlovic D, Spassov A, Lehmann C (2011) Euthanasia: In Defense of A Good, Ancient Word. J Clinic Res Bioeth 2:105. doi: 10.4172/2155-9627.1000105
Copyright: © 2011 Pavlovic D, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Background: It has been suggested that the word euthanasia should be abandoned because widespread imprecise use of the word “euthanasia” deprived it of its precise meaning.
Methods: On the basis of the primary necessary condition for euthanasia – that it be in the interests of the one who will die – we examine the use and meaning of the expression.
Discussion: We demonstrate that above suggestions rely upon flagrant misuse or inappropriate use of the word. The attention of the reader is drawn to morally problematic consequences should the expression “euthanasia” be abandoned and the argument that abandoning the term would be justified is rejected.
Conclusions: Instead of abandoning the word “euthanasia,” care should be taken to use the term correctly in the future. The original meaning of the word “euthanasia” would, thereby, be preserved and we could only benefit from the rich tradition that impregnates that ancient word.