Medical Law, Morality and Legal Duties Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2750 words

Medical Law, Morality and heavy Duties - Essay ExampleThe discussion seeks to answer the question Does the righteousness on abortion and euthanasia rebound honorable obligations of society, or communal outlooks? Harts claims that legal duties must be effectively genuine as common public standards of official behaviour. Although a positivist, in that respect are connotations of morality Harts theory, which requires that legal duties correspond to moral obligations in order to have legal effect. If reference is to be do to social norms which provide the basis of validity for legal duties, the propose coincides rather well. Positivists do not disavow a connection between law and morality they argue that legal duties are not bear on by moral obligations. However, heated public debate on abortion and euthanasia strongly advert otherwise. save, it could be argued that despite the fact that many whitethorn disagree with it, the law in the UK prohibits euthanasia. Does this mean that the criminalisation of euthanasia would reflect moral obligations? It can be accurately stated that perhaps the most historic moral obligation is to preserve the sanctity of life. In this respect, legal duties have been created by moral obligations. Yet the law on abortion permits what could be termed as the killing of a human being. How can the law allow acts which essentially obliterate the moral obligation to preserve life? The conflicting elements provided by this proposition highlight the complexity of the interplay between legal duties and moral obligations not every situation is able to be dealt with similarly, despite the fact that it may essentially be based on the same moral or legal basis.9 It is not a simple application of moral obligations to legal duties or vice versa there is a complex interconnection between conflicting rights and clashing elements. Yet the fact that some may not agree with legal duties in relation to these aspects does not necessarily reduce their validity as law per se. Indeed, Kelsen states that the science of law does not prescribe that one ought to obey the commands of the creator,10 though Hart refers to notions of candidness in order to argue the importance of legal duties.11 If one applies this issue to the courtroom, the attention appears to turn to moral obligations as bases of legal duties. Presented with often vague legislative provisions of law, judges must apply much(prenominal) vague terms to complex, real-life situations. Therefore, a law which prohibits