|
|
|
|
|
by sekm
5072 days ago
|
|
> It's a sad story, but experimentation is necessary to find effective treatments. If you're like many people on HN, you'll agree that terminally ill people should be able to commit suicide. If you grant that, why not let them consent to experimental treatments? While experimentation is a necessity - so are ethics. Apparently they did not have the required approval to conduct the experiments. I've heard that if you sign a contract under the threat of death that it is not legally binding. Now I know the doctors aren't making the threat, but I think the situation is remarkably similar, right? |
|
No, they're polar opposites. If I hold a gun to your head and demand you do something, I am (i) forcing you to do something that is (ii) against your interests. If you're sick and I offer you an experimental treatment, I am (i) not-forcing you to do something that (ii) is in your interests and benefit. It could maybe save your life. A cancer patient is not legally incapacitated like a child; she has the ability and right to make decisions influencing her own life and death.