Ethics of End-of-Life Care: Alzheimer's and Assisted Dying
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Assisted dying and euthanasia are hotly contested end-of-life care options that present pressing dilemmas concerning patient autonomy, relief of suffering, and the misapplication of these delicate medical procedures. Access to and prohibition of these options is predicated on years of legal history, including continuous adjustment, and is actively contested in many places. Each country where at least one of these options is accessible, such as the United States, Canada, and the Netherlands, possesses largely similar restrictions and guidelines, with notable exceptions. Through the examination of data in countries that allow access to assisted dying, euthanasia, or both, it is possible to gather evidence on the impact of these laws and to explore whether current United States law should be adjusted to be more permissive or restrictive. Data showing extremely low rates of prescription and substantial rates of non-ingestion in the US suggests that current laws and restrictions err on the side of caution – perhaps prohibiting access to patients who would otherwise qualify for assisted dying. In contrast, high rates of administration of assisted dying procedures and low rates of withdrawal from the process in the Netherlands and Canada suggest that these locations allow access at too great a rate – perhaps in relation to socialized medicine and policies that allow access to non-terminal patients. Across all locations, lawmakers are faced with the question of how and whether assisted dying can be ethically provided – as laws must make decisive rulings on medical situations that are highly personal and may vary wildly, even between two people diagnosed with the same condition at the same time. Laws allowing assisted dying seek to provide a controlled choice to end one’s own suffering in patients who are experiencing unbearable pain, and often cite concerns such as the fear of future decline and the loss of quality of life by implementing restrictions that necessitate in-depth discussions with multiple physicians, alongside other location-specific requirements. Through the examination of the role of patient autonomy and the options afforded to patients experiencing these extreme end-of-life situations, the ability of assisted dying to relieve suffering in terminal patients in a controlled and painless manner, and a discussion of current data, this work will posit that the current structure of United States laws on assisted dying is extremely restrictive – but that this restrictive approach adequately protects terminal patients and prevents the US from experiencing already high rates of deaths by assisted dying overseas climbing at the steep rates that can be seen in the Netherlands and Canada, and should not be adjusted to be more permissive.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».