Iranian Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine

Patients with advanced, progressive, non-curable, or hardly cured illnesses, found themselves in a situation where therapeutic measures have no effect in improving their condition and health status and they are gradually pushed toward death. Care provided to the patient, during this period, is known as end-of-life care which include life-sustaining treatments and palliative care. Life- sustaining treatments are such that give patient the chance for living longer but inflict lots of suffering upon the patient. While in palliative care, the patient probably survives for a shorter period, but suffers less. The question is whether the patient can choose between the two methods? Considering the Jurisprudential rule of “the necessity to safeguard human life”, most of the Muslim Jurists believe that the patient cannot rule out the first method (i.e. life- sustaining treatment). This study first examines the evidence of the rule, and explained the viewpoints of the Muslim Jurists about choosing between these caring methods, and proves that, despite accepting the rule, it is limited by the rules of “no hardship“ (la haraj) and “prohibition of detriment”(la zarar) and moreover the rule of “the domination”(saltanat). However, it can be said that, regarding the evidence of rule “the necessity to safeguard human life”, patients who are at this stage are excluded from the subject matter of this rule.

Since 1984, criminal law more than any other period has been specified under the framework of human rights and consequently limited based on its principal. It was followed by the emergence of a new approach called “quality of law principle”. In criminal law, which was presented by European Court of Human Rights for the first time then in the content of verdicts issued by this international judicial institute and reconsideration of criminal law legality principle, it has developed and become more consistent with social justice and manners. According to this principle, the qualitative law is a law which is consistent with quality elements of law based on human rights and moral principles. It is interesting to note that lack of each requirement voids the related law and according to Court’s case law, the existence of such law would not be different from lack of law. In present paper, through the investigation of physician liability and focus on article 495 of Islamic Penal Code as the key to legislation in this regard, and given the requirements of quality of law principle, it has been concluded that the above mentioned provision and all other articles related to this context are not consistent with elements of “the Quality of Law”, thus with failure to meet the minimum criteria of justice, social morality and human rights, the law fails to have the required quality and consequently, it is recommended to legislate based on the criteria of Quality of Law.

Medical Philosophy is essential part of medical ethics and history. I has long history and owes its current status to developments resulted by historical, philosophical, social, and cultural experiences. The most important reflection of its revolution is its influence on the goals and missions of higher education in different time periods. In this study, two of the most important philosophical perspectives towards the medical education are compared with the aim of investigating possibilities and limits of each perspective in general education, specialized education, and treatment. The descriptive-analytical method is used for this comparison. These two perspectives are: 1) biomedical philosophy, which is based solely on human biological mechanisms, and 2) humanistic philosophy, which is based on the integrity of the human being. The results of this study show that medical education from the perspective of the biomedical philosophy focuses on specialized education, and treatment from this perspective is performed in the form of a patriarchal relationship. Whereas, from the humanistic perspective, general education is based on the integrity of the human being (including biological, psychological, and ontological) together with the specialized education. Treatment in this approach is achieved through a collaborative relationship between the physician and the patient.

 

The human moral or, in other words, his human dignity has long been the subject of discussions among various thinkers. Almost all theories that have addressed this issue are in principle the dignity of man and the supremacy of his position in relation to all beings, but what makes a different perspective on this topic is the criterion of this dignity and excellence. Making essential decisions for the fetus, including preserving the fetus or abortion, is one of the main applications of the principle of human dignity and is directly is influenced by its human and ethical status. Two groups of theories have focused on the issue of the dignity of the fetus: secular theories and theories based on religions and schools. The secular ideas, have some attractions that human intuition accepts them to some extent, but none is free of criticism, and the critique of each theory is all remarkableness and worthwhile. Hence, this article, while it is reviewing some of the secular views and the views of religions and schools on the status of the embryo and addressing some criticisms of them, provides the dominant human-being theory of fetus based on Shi'a thought and introduces the valuable position of man from fetal times. Finding the root of human dignity by relying on human thought and without resorting to revelation inspiration is faced to serious challenges. Human embryos, due to the ability to become human, have been at the beginning of being a valuable place that increases the value of fetal age when it increases its age so that it is not worthy of human dignity with God's soul. But because its granting by the Lord on the basis of the religious teaching perception, the egg cell should not only be eliminated, but also should be taken care of and protected due to its potential to become human

Scientific research as well as a lot of social and individual effects for human beings has caused many moral problems. The prospect of children building through somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT) or human cloning has caused widespread moral concerns around the world. Accordingly, various reports and regulations have been published at the national and international levels that address the ethical principles for research involving human subjects. In this regard, the Belmont report is of particular importance, in which three fundamental principles of human research have been taken into consideration. These three principles are: the principle of "Respect for Persons", the principle of "Beneficence" and the principle of "justice". In the field of this new biotechnology, namely, human cloning with respect to the use of human subjects in it and according to the ethical principles for research involving human subjects, there are three types of discussion: problems of Safety; a particular problem in the field of business Satisfaction and the problem of the exploitation of women. Considering that about 90% of cloning efforts in animals have been encountered with many problems such as abortion, early death, the development of certain diseases and physical defects, etc., it is not wise to use it in humans and it causes certain and unpredictable problems in cloned people.