Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Intending to avoid the treatment burdens only

The doctrine of double effect and withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining treatment

Bibliographic Data

ID21702276
AuthorsHitoshi Arima (0000-0002-7826-7915, Yokohama City University, corresponding author)
Year2025
Volume46
Issue3
Pages209-230
Publication date2025-06-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueMetamedicine (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0166-2031 • E-ISSN: 1573-1200
PublisherSpringer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1007/s11017-025-09712-7
PMID40117060
OpenAlexW4408737073
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited31

It is often believed that withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining treatment is justifiable only when the patient’s death is not intended. Also, in accordance with this belief, many argue that the justification of withholding/withdrawing life-sustaining treatment is an application of the doctrine of double effect (hereafter DDE). This paper aims to defend these accounts from some important criticisms. Baruch Brody maintains that most people intend the patient’s death when they withhold/withdraw such treatments and that therefore, there are many cases of withholding/withdrawing treatment that are clearly justifiable but rendered unjustifiable by the accounts. Daniel P. Sulmasy asserts that withholding/withdrawing treatment rarely satisfies DDE’s fourth condition (that the good effect of the act is proportionately greater than its bad effect) because the goodness of avoiding treatment burden seldom compares to the badness of shortening life. I examine these claims and show that they are mistaken. Central to the discussion in this paper is the idea that those who withhold/withdraw life-sustaining treatment often only intend to avoid the burdens posed by the treatment itself and not to shorten the patient’s life. It will be argued that both Brody and Sulmasy are led to an erroneous conclusion because they fail to have an accurate understanding of this idea and its implications

Alternative medicine · Doctrine · Intensive care medicine · Law and economics · Life Support Care · Medical treatment · MEDLINE · Philosophy of medicine · Political science · Principle of double effect · Sociology · Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare · Ethics in medical practice · Law · Medicine · Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues · Psychology

  • Double effect sedation

    Hitoshi Arima•Journal of Medical Ethics•2026

  • The Because/in Order to Distinction and the Ethics of Euthanasia

    Open Access•Harrison Lee•Journal of Applied Philosophy•2026

  • The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia

    Neil M Gorsuch•Future of Assisted Suicide and…•2009

  • The Birth of Bioethics

    Albert R Jonsen•The birth of bioethics•1998

  • Active and Passive Euthanasia

    James Rachels•New England Journal of Medicine•1975

  • Intricate Ethics

    F M Kamm•Intricate ethics•2007

Citations per year2
Citation span2026 - 2026 (1)
Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae