Should prisoners be allowed to access assisted suicide? Whereas the ethical and legal issues regarding assisted suicide have now been extensively discussed in the literature, surprisingly scarce attention has been given to the pressing issue of inmates requesting assistance in dying. Through an analysis supported by the Swiss legal framework, I first argue that the principle of equivalence in prison medicine, which states that prisoners ought to receive the same level of health care as the general population does not prove a solid basis in arguing for prisoners' right to assisted suicide. Over the course of the paper, I defend the view that the right to access assisted suicide is to be understood as a liberty that cannot be removed from incarcerated individuals. I argue that removing such a liberty cannot be consistently held within a legal framework where the death penalty does not exist, for doing so necessarily forgoes the State's ability to decide on when and how prisoners' lives end, in turn necessarily leaving them the liberty to end theirs when they decide so. I
This paper seeks to investigate and assess a particular form of relationship between the State and its citizens in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, namely that of obedience to the law and its related right of protest through civil disobedience. We do so by conducting an analysis and normative evaluation of two cases of disobedience to the law: (1) healthcare professionals refusing to attend work as a protest against unsafe working conditions, and (2) citizens who use public demonstration and deliberately ignore measures of social distancing as a way of protesting against lockdown. While different in many aspects, both are substantially similar with respect to one element: their respective protesters both rely on unlawful actions in order to bring change to a policy they consider unjust. We question the extent to which healthcare professionals may participate in civil disobedience with respect to the duty of care intrinsic to the medical profession, and the extent to which opponents of lockdown and confinement measures may reasonably engage in protests without endangering the lives and basic rights of non-dissenting citizens. Drawing on a contractualist normative framework, our analysis leads us to conclude that while both cases qualify as civil disobedience in the descriptive sense, only the case of healthcare professionals qualifies as morally justified civil disobedience.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.