Abstract
Should doctors have the possibility to save children from incurable suffering and end their lives?. At first glance, the standpoints in the debate around this question seem translucent and well known and the debate intelligible. I contend that this is not the case and I will illustrate this in analysing the debate between Peter Singer and Ulrich Bleidick. Whomever wants to answer the question whether it is acceptable to end the lives of suffering small children will have to do some careful reading and thinking about the different and differing moral arguments in the debate. This demands emotional restraint and intellectual honesty. Trying to understand Singer and his opponents is a challenging way of charting what exactly is at stake in this debate.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bleidick, U.: 1997, 'Einfluss hedonistischer Denkweisen auf die Sinnerfahrung in der Geistigbehindertenpädagogik', in: T. Boer, R. Seldenrijk and J. Stolk (eds.), Zinvolle zorgverlening. Wat maakt zorgen voor mensen met een verstandelijke handicap zinvol?(Vereniging 's Heeren Loo), pp. 237-252.
Eibach, U.: 1997, 'Medizintechnik und Leidbewältigung dargestellt am Beispiel der vorgeburtlichter Diagnostik', in: T. Boer, R. Seldenrijk and J. Stolk (eds.), Zinvolle zorgverlening. Wat maakt zorgen voor mensen met een verstandelijke handicap zinvol?(Vereniging 's Heeren Loo), pp. 253-270.
Singer, P.: 1993, Practical Ethics. Cambridge University Press.
Singer, P.: 1995a, How Are We to Live? Ethics in an Age of Self-Interest. Amherst: Prometheus Books.
Singer, P.: 1995b, Rethinking Life and Death. The Collapse of Our Traditional Ethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Maeckelberghe, E. (Mis)Understanding Singer: Replaceability of children or intellectual endeavour?. Med Health Care Philos 5, 297–300 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021120018259
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021120018259