Patient's autonomy, physician's convictions and euthanasia in Belgium

The aim of this paper is to show the inherent contradiction in the Belgian euthanasia practice. While stressing patient’s autonomy, medical professionals exhibit paternalism in deciding the patient’s fate. First, background information is provided. Then the 2014 Belgian Society of Intensive Care Medicine Council Statement Paper will be considered. Concerns are voiced about euthanizing people who fail to find meaning in their lives, including those who underwent unsuccessful sex-change operation and blind people, euthanizing patients who did not give their consent, and euthanizing people with dementia. Finally, some suggestions designed to improve the situation are offered

Fatal Choices and Flawed Decisions at the End of Life: Lessons from Israel

This article presents a recent disconcerting event that took place at a rehabilitative nursing home in Tel Aviv in light of Israel's Dying Patient Law, which came into effect in 2005. It probes the double effect doctrine as it is relevant to the case at hand and the role of the medical profession and of the family in making decisions at the end of life, and it argues that patients who express a wish to die should receive a comprehensive care assessment that addresses their physical and mental condition before rushing to provide lethal medication. The article concludes by offering some guidelines to help practitioners address the intricate questions they face when patients ask to die

First do no harm: euthanasia of patients with dementia in Belgium

Euthanasia in Belgium is not limited to terminally ill patients. It may be applied to patients with chronic degenerative diseases. Currently, people in Belgium wish to make it possible to euthanize incompetent patients who suffer from dementia. This article explains the Belgian law and then explores arguments for and against euthanasia of patients with dementia. It probes the dementia paradox by elucidating Dworkin's distinction between critical and experiential interests, arguing that at the end-of-life this distinction is not clearcut. It argues against euthanasia for patients with dementia, for respecting patients' humanity and for providing them with more care, compassion, and good doctoring

Euthanizing people who are 'tired of life'

In Belgium and the Netherlands, a debate is developing about people who express a desire to end their lives although they do not suffer from an incurable, life-threatening disease. In 2000, a court in Haarlem in the Netherlands considered the case of 86-year-old Edward Brongersma who had expressed his wish to die to his general practitioner, Dr Philip Sutorius, claiming that death had ‘forgotten’ him. His friends and relatives were dead, and he experienced ‘a pointless and empty existence’ (Sheldon 2000). After repeated requests, Dr Sutorius euthanized his insisting patient and was then put on trial. The public prosecution recognized that Dr Sutorius fulfilled all the legal criteria but one: ‘hopeless and unbearable suffering’. Therefore, the patient’s request should have been refused. The court did not discipline Dr Sutorius, saying that the patient was obsessed with his ‘physical decline’ and ‘hopeless existence’ and therefore was suffering ‘hopelessly and unbearably’. A spokesman for the Royal Dutch Medical Association reacted to the court judgement by saying that the definition of ‘unbearable suffering’ had been stretched too far and that ‘what is new is that it goes beyond physical or psychiatric illness to include social decline’ (Cohen-Almagor 2004). The then Justice Minister Benk Korthals said that being ‘tired of life’ is not sufficient reason for euthanasia (Sheldon 2000). Since then, the debate as to whether physicians should comply with euthanasia requests of people who are ‘tired of life’ has been widened and many people in Belgium and in The Netherlands are calling for the law to be expanded in order to include similar patients (Van Wijngaarden et al. 2014)

Netcitizenship: addressing cyberevenge and sexbullying

This article discusses the phenomena of Cyberevenge, sexbullying, and sextortion, especially among young people. The discussion, based on extensive review of books, research reports, newspapers, journal articles and pertinent websites, analyzes these challenges. The article suggests some remedies to counter these online social ills which pertain to promoting responsibility of netcitizens, schools, governments, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) and social networking sites

First do no harm: intentionally shortening lives of patients without their explicit request in Belgium

The aim of this article is to provide a critical review of one of the most worrying aspects of the euthanasia policy and practice in Belgium-the deliberate shortening of lives of some patients without their explicit voluntary request. Some suggestions designed to improve the situation and prevent abuse are offered

Jihad online : how do terrorists use the internet?

Terrorism is designed to attract attention to the terrorist's cause and to spread fear and anxiety among wide circles of the targeted population. This paper provides information about the ways terrorists are using the Internet. The threat of terrorism is real and significant. As the Internet becomes a major arena for modern terrorists, we need to understand how modern terrorism operates and devise appropriate methods to forestall such activities

Why Confronting the Internet’s Dark Side?

Raphael Cohen-Almagor, the author of Confronting the Internet’s Dark Side, explains his motivation for exploring the dangerous side of the world wide web. This new book is the first comprehensive book on social responsibility on the Internet

Fighting hate and bigotry on the Internet

Hate speech is a specific type of online content that is designed to threaten certain groups publicly and act as propaganda for offline organizations. Hate groups use websites for sharing ideology, propaganda, link to similar sites, recruit new converts, advocate violence and threat others. The aim of this paper is to analyse the ways Nethate can be countered. It is written and argued in the realm of ethics, or rather applied ethics. It offers a discussion on moral and social responsibility. Unfortunately, this is a neglected issue in the New Media literature. This study focuses on articulating possible solutions to specific problems and on providing a framework within which these problems can be identified and resolved by accentuating moral and social responsibility. Section II introduces the underpinning concepts of this essay, moral and social responsibility. Section III discusses the targets of hate on the Internet. Finally, Section IV offers practical proposals to address this increasing problem and fight against it. Socially responsible people should not stand idly by while others are abusing the Net to discriminate and victimized their targets for hate