There arise two problems when discussing the doctrine of double effect, the first being the close connection theory, and the second being choice description relativity. First, we’d discuss the choice description relativity. The idea behind choice description relativity is that you can explain the harm away to make it foreseen and unintended. In both CC and HC, the doctor intends to have the fetus and mother survive, and if given the chance to save both, it is expected they would. By stating this fact, the doctrine fails to justify or vilify the actions of the doctor as both actions are bad and unfavorable. Also, in CC, it is not the killing of the mother or fetus that is intended, but a complication that requires the removal of the fetus. At
…show more content…
Quinn states in (article) that the close connection theory is, “…it surely matters how close the connection is between that which is, strictly speaking, intended and the resulting foreseen harm. If the connection is close enough, then the doctrine should treat the harm as if it were strictly intended.” In other words, harm that is unintended is just as bad as intended harm if the connection between the outcome and the harm is close enough. To help explain this, H.L.A. Hart provides the example of someone striking a glass violently to hear the sound of the impact. After striking the glass multiple times, it will shatter. Hart states that the shattering of the glass is, “so immediately and invariably” connected to the impact on the glass that the shattering seems almost intended instead of …show more content…
They also kill most if not all the civilians working inside the factory. By using the close connection theory, if can be stated that the deaths of the workers are so closely connected to the destruction of the facility, the deaths turn from unintended and foreseen, to intended. The pilot bombed the factory knowing fully that innocent people were going to die for the factory to be destroyed and still went through with their mission. In the case of DR, the doctors let the patients die without even being considered for treatment. In HC, the fetus is being killed knowingly. Even with the knowledge that the operation will be fatal for the
Quinn states in (article) that the close connection theory is, “…it surely matters how close the connection is between that which is, strictly speaking, intended and the resulting foreseen harm. If the connection is close enough, then the doctrine should treat the harm as if it were strictly intended.” In other words, harm that is unintended is just as bad as intended harm if the connection between the outcome and the harm is close enough. To help explain this, H.L.A. Hart provides the example of someone striking a glass violently to hear the sound of the impact. After striking the glass multiple times, it will shatter. Hart states that the shattering of the glass is, “so immediately and invariably” connected to the impact on the glass that the shattering seems almost intended instead of …show more content…
They also kill most if not all the civilians working inside the factory. By using the close connection theory, if can be stated that the deaths of the workers are so closely connected to the destruction of the facility, the deaths turn from unintended and foreseen, to intended. The pilot bombed the factory knowing fully that innocent people were going to die for the factory to be destroyed and still went through with their mission. In the case of DR, the doctors let the patients die without even being considered for treatment. In HC, the fetus is being killed knowingly. Even with the knowledge that the operation will be fatal for the