"Right to die": Changing "right" to "duty" may focus debate

doi:10.1136/bmj.330.7504.1388-b

BMJ 2005;330:1388 (11 June), doi:10.1136/bmj.330.7504.1388-b

Letter

"Right to die"

Changing "right" to "duty" may focus debate

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

EDITOR—The predictable outcry over Grayling's editorialon the "right to die" has added little to an emotive debate.¹The concept of a right to die is clearly in accordance withthe current obsession with autonomy in vogue in UK medical ethics.

Responses restating Christian objections to any perceived underminingof the right to life, and objections from doctors about thelack of moral difference between omission and commission beingsecondary to effects on the moral agenda, are not fundamentalto the issue—though both are views I share.

I believe that a more rigorous ethical refutation is found inmoral argument against our rights based culture. Replacementof the term "right" by the term "duty" focuses the debate. Oncethe initial reactionary problems are explored, as in Hardwig'sarticle,² we can, in accordance with our interdependent humansociety, enable everybody to prepare for the best death thatwe can . . . [Full text of this article]

Joe Brierley, consultant intensivist

Great Ormond Street Hospital, London WC1N 3JH joethebaptist@doctors.org.uk