|
Briefing on the Mental Capacity Bill (2004)
Prepared by: The Linacre Centre, the Centre for Bioethics and Public Policy, CARE, the Christian Peoples Alliance, the Guild of Catholic Doctors and the Medical Ethics Alliance. A pdf of this report is available here. |
|
Human Dignity, Autonomy and Mentally Incapacitated Persons (1998)
A response to Who Decides? submitted by the Linacre Centre for Healthcare Ethics at the request of the Roman Catholic Bishops of England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland. |
|
Response to "Withdrawing and Withholding Treatment" (1998)
The Linacre Centre's response to a consultation paper from the BMA's Medical Ethics Committee. A pdf of this report is available here. |
|
Submission on the Draft Mental Incapacity Bill (2003)
A joint submission by the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales and the Linacre Centre for Healthcare Ethics |
|
Submission to the House of Lords Select Committee on the Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill (2004)
Euthanasia is standardly defended by reference to one or both of two considerations: autonomy and welfare. Either consideration can lead to much more widespread euthanasia than defenders of its legalisation had originally envisaged. If euthanasia is about patient choice, why should the patient need to be terminally - or physically - ill to receive it? If euthanasia is about benefiting the patient, why should patients who cannot request it be deprived of this benefit? Thus we see in the Neth |
|
Submission to the Select Committee of the House of Lords on Medical Ethics (1993)
Key issues discussed: Euthanasia - the sanctity of life - autonomy - doctors' duties - withdrawal and refusal of treatment - advance directives - proxy decision-making - the role of the courts - 'responsible medical opinion' - legislative proposals - Bland - the hospice movement - advances in palliative care - the Dutch experience. |
|
The BMA Report on Euthanasia and the Case Against Legalization (1994)
A review of the Report by Luke Gormally.* A pdf is available here. |