The New England Journal of Medicine
e-mail icon  FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |    Advanced Search
Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe
 
Occasional Notes
PreviousPrevious
Volume 329:1039-1040 September 30, 1993 Number 14
NextNext

The Ambiguity of Clinical Intentions

Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

 Sign up for free e-toc
 

This Article
-Full Text
-Purchase this article

Tools and Services
-Add to Personal Archive
-Add to Citation Manager
-Notify a Friend
-E-mail When Cited

More Information
-PubMed Citation
Medical ethicists place great weight on the intentions of clinical actions. The religious principle of "double effect," based on a distinction between intentions and consequences, is an ethical cornerstone in the medical treatment of the terminally ill1,2. Giving high doses of narcotic analgesics to a dying patient to relieve pain and suffering is considered ethical even if it inadvertently hastens death, provided the clinician did not intend to help the patient die. Death may even be foreseen as a side effect of the intervention as long as it is not intended. On the other hand, should a clinician remotely . . . [Full Text of this Article]

References


This article has been cited by other articles:



HOME  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SEARCH  |  CURRENT ISSUE  |  PAST ISSUES  |  COLLECTIONS  |  PRIVACY  |  TERMS OF USE  |  HELP  |  beta.nejm.org

Comments and questions? Please contact us.

The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.