The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in medical-ethical perspective

Published: February 28, 1999
Abstract Views: 154
PDF (Italiano): 0
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Authors

Notwithstanding its impressive achievements in combating crimes against humanity, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights offers no sufficient basis for medical ethics. It does not provide a clear definition of the human being who is subject of human rights, thus giving room for philosophical anthropologies according to which fetuses or neonates are no human persons yet or at most 'marginal persons'. Because the Declaration likewise fails to define the concept of right, it can be interpreted from the perspective of classical theories of right as well as from that of the 'choice theory of right'. If, as the last states, the right to life would include the right to dispose of it, the Declaration could serve to defend euthanasia, assisted suicide and manipulative medical and surgical interventions as well.

Dimensions

Altmetric

PlumX Metrics

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Citations

How to Cite

Eijk, W. J. (1999). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in medical-ethical perspective. Medicina E Morale, 48(1), 49–59. https://doi.org/10.4081/mem.1999.809