Buddhism and Bioethics

Reviewed by D.J.M. de Vries

The Lancet

Vol.347 No.9001

1996.03.02

Pp. 601-602

Copyright by Lancet Ltd.


          "A doctor who administers euthanasia is acting as a `knife-bringer' 
            and thereby doing something which is explicitly prohibited by 
            Buddhist precepts." At first sight there is seemingly nothing new 
            with such a statement: euthanasia is explicitly declared illicit yet 
            again. On reflection, however, there is a difference from western 
            bioethics. In Buddhism, it is assumed that an individual life may 
            manifest itself in different forms at different times - there is 
            rebirth and reincarnation. This assumption has far-reaching 
            consequences. When, according to Buddhist tradition, does a new life 
            start and when does it end? The answer is of great importance for 
            the way that one deals with the dilemmas concerning abortion, embryo 
            research, and fertility control on the one hand and with persistent 
            vegetative state and euthanasia on the other. All of this - and much 
            more - is discussed in detail in the second chapter ("at the 
            beginning of life") and in the third ("at the end of life"). 
            But Keown begins with a lucid exposition of Buddhist ethics and of 
            the role of ethics in Buddhism. The basis for the author's approach 
            to the bioethical issues is the principle that "Karmic life must 
            never be destroyed intentionally re-gardless of the quality of 
            motivation behind the act or the good consequences which may be 
            thought to flow from it". 
            Deeper understanding of the Buddhist tradition might also be of help 
            in defining concepts, for example the definition of euthanasia. 
            Whereas the author makes use of the following definition: "the 
            intentional killing of a patient by act or omission as part of his 
            medical care", another is in use in the Netherlands: "the 
            intentional taking of the life of a person upon his or her explicit 
            request by someone other than the person concerned". What has 
            Buddhist tradition to tell us about the role of the intentions of 
            the doctor and what about the autonomy and volition of the patient 
            involved? Could it give us a better understanding of what is 
            fundamental? 
            Buddhism and Bioethics represents a gallant effort to introduce a 
            general readership in the complex matter of biomedical ethics looked 
            at from a Buddhist perspective. Keown was faced with many 
            difficulties: western biomedical dilemmas had to be put in eastern, 
            Buddhist, terms and - at least equally important - he had to break 
            new ground because only a few studies of Buddhist ethics on the 
            beginning and end of life are available. This text makes an 
            important contribution to the transcultural study of biomedical 
            ethics.