Results for 'double effect'

1000+ found
Order:
See also
  1.  83
    Can DoubleEffect Reasoning Justify Lethal Organ Donation?Adam Omelianchuk - 2022 - Bioethics 36 (6):648-654.
    Bioethics, Volume 36, Issue 6, Page 648-654, July 2022.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2.  4
    Double-Effect Reasoning: Doing Good & Avoiding Evil.T. A. Cavanaugh - 2006 - Oxford University Press UK.
    T. A. Cavanaugh defends double-effect reasoning, also known as the principle of double effect. DER plays a role in anti-consequentialist ethics, in hard cases in which one cannot realize a good without also causing a foreseen, but not intended, bad effect. This study is the first book-length account of the history and issues surrounding this controversial approach to hard cases. It will be indispensable in theoretical ethics, applied ethics, and moral theology. It will also interest (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  3. Double-Effect Reasoning: Doing Good and Avoiding Evil.T. A. Cavanaugh - 2006 - Oxford University Press.
    T. A. Cavanaugh defends double-effect reasoning (DER), also known as the principle of double effect. DER plays a role in anti-consequentialist ethics (such as deontology), in hard cases in which one cannot realize a good without also causing a foreseen, but not intended, bad effect (for example, killing non-combatants when bombing a military target). This study is the first book-length account of the history and issues surrounding this controversial approach to hard cases. It will be (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   36 citations  
  4. Defending Double Effect.Ralph Wedgwood - 2011 - Ratio 24 (4):384-401.
    This essay defends a version of the Doctrine of Double Effect (DDE) – the doctrine that there is normally a stronger reason against an act that has a bad state of affairs as one of its intended effects than against an otherwise similar act that has that bad state of affairs as an unintended effect. First, a precise account of this version of the DDE is given. Secondly, some suggestions are made about why we should believe the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   41 citations  
  5. Double Effect and Terror Bombing.Ezio Di Nucci - 2013 - In T. Spitzley, M. Hoeltje & W. Spohn (eds.), Was dürfen wir glauben? Was sollen wir tun? Sektionsbeiträge des achten internationalen Kongresses der Gesellschaft für Analytische Philosophie e.V. GAP.
    I argue against the Doctrine of Double Effect’s explanation of the moral difference between terror bombing and strategic bombing. I show that the standard thought-experiment of Terror Bomber and Strategic Bomber which dominates this debate is underdetermined in three crucial respects: (1) the non-psychological worlds of Terror Bomber and Strategic Bomber; (2) the psychologies of Terror Bomber and Strategic Bomber; and (3) the structure of the thought-experiment, especially in relation to its similarity with the Trolley Problem. (1) If (...)
    Direct download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  6.  66
    Double Effect and the Criminal Law.Alexander Sarch - 2017 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 11 (3):453-479.
    American criminal law is committed to some version of the doctrine of double effect. In this paper, I defend a new variant of the agent-centered rationale for a version of DDE that is of particular relevance to the criminal law. In particular, I argue for a non-absolute version of DDE that concerns the relative culpability of intending a bad or wrongful state of affairs as opposed to bringing it about merely knowingly. My aim is to identify a particular (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  7.  97
    Double Effect, All Over Again: The Case of Sister Margaret McBride.Bernard G. Prusak - 2011 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 32 (4):271-283.
    As media reports have made widely known, in November 2009, the ethics committee of St. Joseph’s Hospital in Phoenix, Arizona, permitted the abortion of an eleven-week-old fetus in order to save the life of its mother. This woman was suffering from acute pulmonary hypertension, which her doctors judged would prove fatal for both her and her previable child. The ethics committee believed abortion to be permitted in this case under the so-called principle of double effect, but Thomas J. (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  8.  4
    Opioids, Double Effect, and the Prospects of Hastening Death.Philip A. Reed - 2021 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 46 (5):505-515.
    The relevance of double effect for end-of-life decision-making has been challenged recently by a number of scholars. The principal reason is that opioids such as morphine do not usually hasten death when administered to relieve pain at the end of life; therefore, no secondary “doubleeffect is brought about. In my article, I argue against this view, showing how the doctrine of double effect is relevant to the administration of opioids at the end of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  9.  23
    Double Effect & Ectopic Pregnancy – Some Problems.Michal Pruski - 2019 - Catholic Medical Quarterly 69 (2):17-20.
    This paper looks at the Catholic justification of medical interventions in ectopic pregnancies. The paper first shows that the way how Double Effect Reasoning is often applied to ectopic pregnancies is not consistent with the way Aquinas introduces this mode of reasoning. The paper then shows certain problems in common defences of the use of salpingectomies. The paper then re-evaluates the medical interventions used in the management of ectopic pregnancies, with both a focus on the aim of the (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  10. Doctrine of Double Effect.Alison McIntyre - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    The doctrine (or principle) of double effect is often invoked to explain the permissibility of an action that causes a serious harm, such as the death of a human being, as a side effect of promoting some good end. According to the principle of double effect, sometimes it is permissible to cause a harm as a side effect (or “double effect”) of bringing about a good result even though it would not be (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   50 citations  
  11. Double Effect, Triple Effect and the Trolley Problem: Squaring the Circle in Looping Cases: Michael Otsuka.Michael Otsuka - 2008 - Utilitas 20 (1):92-110.
    In the Trolley Case, as devised by Philippa Foot and modified by Judith Jarvis Thomson, a runaway trolley is headed down a main track and will hit and kill five unless you divert it onto a side track, where it will hit and kill one.
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   20 citations  
  12. Defending Double Effect.Alison Hills - 2003 - Philosophical Studies 116 (2):133-152.
    According to the doctrine of double effect(DDE), there is a morally significantdifference between harm that is intended andharm that is merely foreseen and not intended.It is not difficult to explain why it is bad tointend harm as an end (you have a ``badattitude'' toward that harm) but it is hard toexplain why it is bad to intend harm as a meansto some good end. If you intend harm as a meansto some good end, you need not have a (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  13. Objective Double Effect and the Avoidance of Narcissism.Howard Nye - 2013 - In Mark Timmons (ed.), Oxford Studies in Normative Ethics, Volume 3. Oxford University Press. pp. 260-286.
    The Doctrine of Double Effect [DDE] states roughly that it is harder to justify causing or allowing harm as a means to an end than it is to justify conduct that results in harm as a side effect. This chapter argues that a theory of deontological constraints on harming needs something like the DDE in order to avoid the charge that it reflects a narcissistic obsession with the cleanliness of our own hands. Unfortunately, the DDE is often (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  14.  48
    Double Effect, Double Intention, and Asymmetric Warfare.Steven Lee - 2004 - Journal of Military Ethics 3 (3):233-251.
    Modern warfare cannot be conducted without civilians being killed. In order to reconcile this fact with the principle of discrimination in just war theory, the principle is applied through the doctrine of double effect. But this doctrine is morally inadequate because it is too permissive regarding the risk to civilians. For this reason, Michael Walzer has suggested that the doctrine be supplemented with what he calls the idea of double intention: combatants are not only to refrain from (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  15. Double Effect.William David Solomon - 1992 - In Lawrence C. Becker & Charlotte B. Becker (eds.), The Encyclopedia of Ethics. Garland Publishing.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  16.  58
    Double Effect: A Useful Rule That Alone Cannot Justify Hastening Death.J. A. Billings - 2011 - Journal of Medical Ethics 37 (7):437-440.
    The rule of double effect is regularly invoked in ethical discussions about palliative sedation, terminal extubation and other clinical acts that may be viewed as hastening death for imminently dying patients. Unfortunately, the literature tends to employ this useful principle in a fashion suggesting that it offers the final word on the moral acceptability of such medical procedures. In fact, the rule cannot be applied appropriately without invoking moral theories that are not explicit in the rule itself. Four (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  17.  73
    Double Effect, Doing and Allowing, and the Relaxed Nonconsequentialist.Fiona Woollard - 2017 - Philosophical Explorations 20 (sup2):142-158.
    Many philosophers display relaxed scepticism about the Doctrine of Doing and Allowing and the Doctrine of Double Effect, suspecting, without great alarm, that one or both of these Doctrines is indefensible. This relaxed scepticism is misplaced. Anyone who aims to endorse a theory of right action with Nonconsequentialist implications should accept both the DDA and the DDE. First, even to state a Nonconsequentialist theory requires drawing a distinction between respecting and promoting values. This cannot be done without accepting (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  18.  55
    Risk, Double Effect and the Social Benefit Requirement.Robert C. Hughes - 2021 - Journal of Medical Ethics 47 (12):29-29.
    Many ethicists maintain that medical research on human subjects that presents no prospect of direct medical benefit must have a prospect of social benefit to be ethical. Payment is not the sort of benefit that justifies exposing subjects to risk. Alan Wertheimer has raised a serious challenge to this view, pointing out that in industry, social value is not considered necessary to make dangerous jobs ethical. This article argues that Wertheimer was correct to think that the ethics of hazard pay (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19. Scanlon on Double Effect[REVIEW]Ralph Wedgwood - 2011 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 83 (2):464-472.
    In this new book Moral Dimensions, T. M. Scanlon (2008) explores the ethical significance of the intentions and motives with which people act. According to Scanlon, these intentions and motives do not have any direct bearing on the permissibility of the act. Thus, Scanlon claims that the traditional Doctrine of Double Effect (DDE) is mistaken. However, the way in which someone is motivated to act has a direct bearing on what Scanlon calls the act's "meaning". One particularly important (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  20. Doing Away with Double Effect.Alison McIntyre - 2001 - Ethics 111 (2):219-255.
    I will introduce six constraints that should guide the formulation and use of DE. One goal in listing them is to engage in dialectical fair play by ruling out criticisms of the doctrine that are directed at misformulations of DE or that result from misapplications of it. Each of these constraints should be acceptable to any proponent of DE. Yet when these constraints on the application of DE are respected, it becomes clear that many of the examples provided as illustrations (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   63 citations  
  21.  33
    Double-Effect Reasoning and the Conception of Human Embryos.Timothy F. Murphy - 2013 - Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (8):529-532.
    Some commentators argue that conception signals the onset of human personhood and that moral responsibilities toward zygotic or embryonic persons begin at this point, not the least of which is to protect them from exposure to death. Critics of the conception threshold of personhood ask how it can be morally consistent to object to the embryo loss that occurs in fertility medicine and research but not object to the significant embryo loss that occurs through conception in vivo. Using that apparent (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  22. Double Effect Reasoning: Why We Need It.Helen Watt - 2017 - Ethics and Medicine 33 (1):13-19.
    The “principle of double effect” is a vital tool for moral decision making and is applicable to all areas of medical practice, including (for example) end-of-life care, transplant medicine, and cases of conscientious objection. Both our ultimate and our more immediate intentions are relevant in making and evaluating choices— though side effects must be kept proportionate and can be morally conclusive when linked with some intentions. Intentions help to form the character of doctors, and of human beings generally. (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23. The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of the Double Effect.Philippa Foot - 1967 - Oxford Review 5:5-15.
    One of the reasons why most of us feel puzzled about the problem of abortion is that we want, and do not want, to allow to the unborn child the rights that belong to adults and children. When we think of a baby about to be born it seems absurd to think that the next few minutes or even hours could make so radical a difference to its status; yet as we go back in the life of the fetus we (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   418 citations  
  24.  46
    The Double Effect Effect.Charles Foster, Jonathan Herring, Karen Melham & Tony Hope - 2011 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 20 (1):56-72.
    The “doctrine of double effect” has a pleasing ring to it. It is regarded by some as the cornerstone of any sound approach to end-of-life issues and by others as religious mumbo jumbo. Discussions about “the doctrine” often generate more heat than light. They are often conducted at cross-purposes and laced with footnotes from Leviticus.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  25. Double Effect, Triple Effect and the Trolley Problem: Squaring the Circle in Looping Cases.Michael Otsuka - 2008
    In the Trolley Case, as devised by Philippa Foot and modified by Judith Jarvis Thomson, a runaway trolley is headed down a main track and will hit and kill five unless you divert it onto a side track, where it will hit and kill one.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  26. Three Cheers for Double Effect.Dana Kay Nelkin & Samuel C. Rickless - 2014 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 89 (1):125-158.
    The doctrine of double effect, together with other moral principles that appeal to the intentions of moral agents, has come under attack from many directions in recent years, as have a variety of rationales that have been given in favor of it. In this paper, our aim is to develop, defend, and provide a new theoretical rationale for a secular version of the doctrine. Following Quinn (1989), we distinguish between Harmful Direct Agency and Harmful Indirect Agency. We propose (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   20 citations  
  27. Double Effect Donation.Charles Camosy & Joseph Vukov - 2021 - The Linacre Quarterly 88 (2):149-162.
    Double Effect Donation claims it is permissible for a person meeting brain death criteria to donate vital organs, even though such a person may be alive. The reason this act is permissible is that it does not aim at one’s own death but rather at saving the lives of others, and because saving the lives of others constitutes a proportionately serious reason for engaging in a behavior in which one foresees one’s death as the outcome. Double (...) Donation, we argue, opens a novel position in debates surrounding brain death and organ donation, and does so without compromising the sacredness and fundamental equality of human life. (shrink)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  28. Embryo Loss and Double Effect.Ezio Di Nucci - 2013 - Journal of Medical Ethics 39 (8):537-540.
    I defend the argument that if embryo loss in stem cell research is morally problematic, then embryo loss in in vivo conception is similarly morally problematic. According to a recent challenge to this argument, we can distinguish between in vivo embryo loss and the in vitro embryo loss of stem cell research by appealing to the doctrine of double effect. I argue that this challenge fails to show that in vivo embryo loss is a mere unintended side (...) while in vitro embryo loss is an intended means and that, even if we refine the challenge by appealing to Michael Bratman's three roles of intention, the distinction is still unwarranted. (shrink)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  29. The Doctrine of Double Effect: Intention and Permissibility.William J. FitzPatrick - 2012 - Philosophy Compass 7 (3):183-196.
    The Doctrine of Double Effect (DDE) is an influential non-consequentialist principle positing a role for intention in affecting the moral permissibility of some actions. In particular, the DDE focuses on the intend/foresee distinction, the core claim being that it is sometimes permissible to bring about as a foreseen but unintended side-effect of one’s action some harm it would have been impermissible to aim at as a means or as an end, all else being equal. This article explores (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  30. Unequal Vividness and Double Effect.Neil Sinhababu - 2013 - Utilitas 25 (3):291-315.
    I argue that the Doctrine of Double Effect is accepted because of unreliable processes of belief-formation, making it unacceptably likely to be mistaken. We accept the doctrine because we more vividly imagine intended consequences of our actions than merely foreseen ones, making our aversions to the intended harms more violent, and making us judge that producing the intended harms is morally worse. This explanation fits psychological evidence from Schnall and others, and recent neuroscientific research from Greene, Klein, Kahane, (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  31.  20
    Double Effect and U.S. Supreme Court Reasoning.Lisa Gasbarre Black - 2011 - The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 11 (1):41-48.
    Legal minds have utilized the principle of double effect as proposed by St. Thomas Aquinas for centuries to shape legal authority in cases where moral judgment and legal reasoning meet. The U.S. Supreme Court had uti­lized double-effect reasoning in the realm of self-defense cases. This article discusses more recent use of double-effect reasoning in the landmark Supreme Court case Vacco v. Quill and its companion case, Washington v. Glucksberg. Chief Justice William Rehnquist, writing for (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  32. Who is Entitled to Double Effect?Joseph Boyle - 1991 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (5):475-494.
    The doctrine of double effect continues to be an important tool in bioethical casuistry. Its role within the Catholic moral tradition continues, and there is considerable interest in it by contemporary moral philosophers. But problems of justification and correct application remain. I argue that if the traditional Catholic conviction that there are exceptionless norms prohibiting inflicting some kinds of harms on people is correct, then double effect is justified and necessary. The objection that double (...) is superfluous is a rejection of that normative conviction, not a refutation of double effect itself. This justification suggests the correct way of applying double effect to controversial cases. But versions of double effect which dispense with the absolutism of the Catholic tradition lack justification and fall to the objection that double effect is an unnecessary complication. Keywords: double effect, intention, side effect CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us What's this? (shrink)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   33 citations  
  33.  62
    Two Challenges to the Double Effect Doctrine: Euthanasia and Abortion.A. B. Shaw - 2002 - Journal of Medical Ethics 28 (2):102-104.
    The validity of the double effect doctrine is examined in euthanasia and abortion. In these two situations killing is a method of treatment. It is argued that the doctrine cannot apply to the care of the dying. Firstly, doctors are obliged to harm patients in order to do good to them. Secondly, patients should make their own value judgments about being mutilated or killed. Thirdly, there is little intuitive moral difference between direct and indirect killing. Nor can the (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  34.  93
    Commentary: Double Effect—Intention is the Solution, Not the Problem.Daniel P. Sulmasy - 2000 - Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 28 (1):26-29.
  35. Revising the Doctrine of Double Effect.Jeff McMahan - 1994 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 11 (2):201-212.
    The Doctrine of Double Effect has been challenged by the claim that what an agent intends as a means may be limited to those effects that are precisely characterized by the descriptions under which the agent believes that they are minimally causally necessary for the production of other effects that the agent seeks to bring about. If based on so narrow a conception of an intended means, the traditional Doctrine of Double Effect becomes limitlessly permissive. In (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   29 citations  
  36. The Double Life of Double Effect.Allison McIntyre - 2004 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 25 (1):61-74.
    The U.S. Supreme Court's majority opinion in Vacco v. Quill assumes that the principle of double effect explains the permissibility of hastening death in the context of ordinary palliative care and in extraordinary cases in which painkilling drugs have failed to relieve especially intractable suffering and terminal sedation has been adopted as a last resort. The traditional doctrine of double effect, understood as providing a prohibition on instrumental harming as opposed to incidental harming or harming asa (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  37. The Double Failure of 'Double Effect'.Neil Roughley - 2007 - In Christoph Lumer & Sandro Nannini (eds.), Intentionality, Deliberation, and Autonomy. Ashgate.
    The ‘doctrine of double effect’ claims that it is in some sense morally less problematic to bring about a negatively evaluated state of affairs as a ‘side effect’ of one’s pursuit of another, morally unobjectionable aim than it is to bring it about in order to achieve that aim. In a first step, this chapter discusses the descriptive difference on which the claim is built. That difference is shown to derive from the attitudinal distinction between intention and (...)
    Direct download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  38.  37
    Aquinas, Double-Effect Reasoning, and the Pauline Principle.Bernard G. Prusak - 2015 - American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 89 (3):505-520.
    This paper reconsiders whether Aquinas is rightly read as a double-effect thinker and whether it is right to understand him as concurring with Paul’s dictum that evil is not to be done that good may come. I focus on what to make of Aquinas’s position that, though the private citizen may not intend to kill a man in self-defense, those holding public authority, like soldiers, may rightly do so. On my interpretation, we cannot attribute to Aquinas the position (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  39. Is the Doctrine of Double Effect Irrelevant in End-of-Life Decision Making?Peter Allmark, Mark Cobb, B. Jane Liddle & Angela Mary Tod - 2010 - Nursing Philosophy 11 (3):170-177.
    In this paper, we consider three arguments for the irrelevance of the doctrine of double effect in end-of-life decision making. The third argument is our own and, to that extent, we seek to defend it. The first argument is that end-of-life decisions do not in fact shorten lives and that therefore there is no need for the doctrine in justification of these decisions. We reject this argument; some end-of-life decisions clearly shorten lives. The second is that the doctrine (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  40. Trolleys and Double Effect in Experimental Ethics.Ezio Di Nucci - forthcoming - In Christoph Luetge, Hannes Rusch & Matthias Uhl (eds.), Experimental Ethics. Palgrave-Macmillan.
    I analyse the relationship between the Doctrine of Double Effect and the Trolley Problem: the former offers a solution for the latter only on the premise that killing the one in Bystander at the Switch is permissible. Here I offer both empirical and theoretical arguments against the permissibility of killing the one: firstly, I present data from my own empirical studies according to which the intuition that killing the one is permissible is neither widespread nor stable; secondly, I (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  41. Aristotle and Double Effect.Ezio Di Nucci - 2014 - Journal of Ancient Philosophy 8 (1):20.
    There are some interesting similarities between Aristotle’s ‘mixed actions’ in Book III of the Nicomachean Ethics and the actions often thought to be justifiable with the Doctrine of Double Effect. Here I analyse these similarities by comparing Aristotle’s examples of mixed actions with standard cases from the literature on double effect such as, amongst others, strategic bombing, the trolley problem, and craniotomy. I find that, despite some common features such as the dilemmatic structure and the inevitability (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  42. Medical Ethics and Double Effect: The Case of Terminal Sedation.Joseph Boyle - 2004 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 25 (1):51-60.
    The use of terminal sedation to control theintense discomfort of dying patients appearsboth to be an established practice inpalliative care and to run counter to the moraland legal norm that forbids health careprofessionals from intentionally killingpatients. This raises the worry that therequirements of established palliative care areincompatible with moral and legal opposition toeuthanasia. This paper explains how thedoctrine of double effect can be relied on todistinguish terminal sedation from euthanasia. The doctrine of double effect is rooted (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  43.  70
    The Doctrine of Double Effect and the Question of Constraints on Business Decisions.Patrick A. Tully - 2005 - Journal of Business Ethics 58 (1-3):51-63.
    . How does the doctrine of double effect apply to business decisions to sell products which may be harmful to consumers? Lawrence Masek believes that some authors have misapplied the doctrine to this type of decision and, as a consequence, have committed themselves to placing unwarranted constraints on businesses. Seeking to correct this mistake, Masek presents his account of how the doctrine applies here, an account which is rather permissive but which, he claims, nevertheless preserves the virtues of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  44.  76
    “Reinventing” the Rule of Double Effect.Daniel P. Sulmasy - 2007 - In Bonnie Steinbock (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Bioethics. Oxford University Press. pp. 114--49.
    The Rule of Double Effect has played an important role in bioethics, especially during the last fifty years. Its major application in bioethics has been in providing physicians who are opposed to euthanasia with a moral justification for using opioid analgesics in treating the pain of patients whose death might thereby be hastened. It has also prominently been applied to certain obstetric cases. The scope of application of double effect is actually much broader than medical ethics, (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  45. Deconstructing the Doctrine of Double Effect.Richard Hull - 2000 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 3 (2):195-207.
    This paper examines the doctrine of double effect as it is typically applied. The difficulty of distinguishing between what we intend and what we foresee is highlighted. In particular, Warren Quinn's articulation of that distinction is examined and criticised. It is then proposed that the only credible way that we can be said to foresee that a harm will result and mean something other than that we intend it to result, is if we are not certain that that (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  46. Four Versions of Double Effect.Donald B. Marquis - 1991 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (5):515-544.
    Recent discussions of the doctrine of double effect have contained improved versions of the doctrine not subject to some of the difficulties of earlier versions. There is no longer one doctrine of double effect. This essay evaluates four versions of the doctrine: two formulations of the traditional Catholic doctrine, Joseph Boyle's revision of that doctrine, and Warren Quinn's version of the doctrine. I conclude that all of these versions are flawed. Keywords: double effect, intention, (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  47.  75
    Double Effect and the Ethical Significance of Distinct Volitional States.T. Cavanaugh - 1997 - Christian Bioethics 3 (2):131-141.
    Much of Roman Catholic discussion concerning bioethical controversies, such as the surgical removal of a life-threatening cancerous uterus when the fetus is not viable, has focused on the employment of double-effect reasoning. While double-effect reasoning has been the subject of much debate, this paper argues first, that there is a distinction between the intended and the foreseen; second, that this distinction applies to the contrasted cases in such a way as to categorize foreseen but not intended (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  48. A Stronger Doctrine of Double Effect.Ben Bronner & Simon Goldstein - 2018 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 96 (4):793-805.
    Many believe that intended harms are more difficult to justify than are harms that result as a foreseen side effect of one's conduct. We describe cases of harming in which the harm is not intended, yet the harmful act nevertheless runs afoul of the intuitive moral constraint that governs intended harms. We note that these cases provide new and improved counterexamples to the so-called Simple View, according to which intentionally phi-ing requires intending to phi. We then give a new (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  49. The Doctrine of Double Effect: Problems of Interpretation.Nancy Davis - 1984 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 65 (2):107.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   27 citations  
  50. The Doctrine of Double Effect: Reflections on Theoretical and Practical Issues.Frances M. Kamm - 1991 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (5):571-585.
    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 (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
1 — 50 / 1000