Judging who should live: Schneiderman and Jecker on the duty not to treat

Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 23 (5):500 – 515 (1998)
In this paper, I consider the thesis advanced by Lawrence J. Schneiderman and Nancy S. Jecker that physicians should be forbidden from offering futile treatments to patients. I distinguish between a version of this thesis that is trivially true and Schneiderman and Jecker's more substantive version of the thesis. I find that their positive arguments for their thesis are unsuccessful, and sometimes quite misleading. I advance an argument against their thesis, and find that, on balance, their thesis should be rejected. I briefly argue that a resolution of the debate about medical futility will require addressing deeper issues about value.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1076/jmep.23.5.500.2565
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
Edit this record
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Mark as duplicate
Request removal from index
Revision history
Download options
Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 30,694
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Is the Treatment Beneficial, Experimental, or Futile?Lawrence J. Schneiderman & Nancy S. Jecker - 1996 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 5 (2):248.
Understanding the Separation Thesis.Joakim Sandberg - 2008 - Business Ethics Quarterly 18 (2):213-232.
Medical Futility: The Duty Not to Treat.Nancy S. Jecker & Lawrence J. Schneiderman - 1993 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2 (2):151.
Added to PP index

Total downloads
18 ( #279,562 of 2,197,231 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #298,376 of 2,197,231 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads
My notes
Sign in to use this feature