Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (5):571-585 (1991)

Frances Myrna Kamm
Rutgers University - New Brunswick
The Doctrine of Double Effect and the Principle of Do No Harm raise important theoretical and practical issues, some of which are discussed by Boyle, Donagan, and Quinn. I argue that neither principle is correct, and some revisionist, and probably nonabsolutist, analysis of constraints on action and omission is necessary. In making these points, I examine several approaches to deflection of threat cases, discuss an argument for the permissibility of voluntary euthanasia, and present arguments relevant to medical contexts which justify intentionally hanning some to aid others, with and without the consent of those harmed. Keywords: consent, double effect, euthanasia, harming, organ transplantation, scarce resources, trolley problem CiteULike Connotea What's this?
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1093/jmp/16.5.571
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,172
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Doctrine of Double Effect.Alison McIntyre - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Defending Double Effect.Alison Hills - 2003 - Philosophical Studies 116 (2):133-152.

View all 10 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
138 ( #85,678 of 2,517,882 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #272,606 of 2,517,882 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes