The subject of euthanasia has generated many controversial debates, particularly on its legality. This has been primarily due to the doctrine of sanctity of life which is a predominant principle in many religions and is embedded in moral values. The underlying precept is that human life is sacred and demands respect, as all life comes from God and life can only be taken away intentionally through due process of law. Thus, ending a person's life, even upon his or her request, is considered in many jurisdictions as a criminal offence. Irrespective of humanitarian motives, a doctor who aids a patient in this act will be in breach of his unequivocal duty as a doctor and considered to have committed an unlawful act, which will subject him to legal sanctions. Countries such as the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and Turkey have explicit legal provisions banning, in particular, active euthanasia, while countries such as the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland and certain states in the U.S have taken positive steps to legalise euthanasia in certain aspects. The ethical codes and laws in Malaysia have yet to develop to the fullest extent in dealing with these issues. Although Malaysian statutory legislation contains provisions banning active euthanasia, the legal position on passive euthanasia remains implicit. In the absence of indicative legal provisions and judicial precedents governing certain matters arising, it has been the practice of the Malaysian courts to refer to relevant legal principles inherent in English cases. As Islam is proclaimed as the country's official religion, the Islamic perspective is also an important and influential factor in the development of the legal framework in Malaysia as a whole. Thus, there is a need for the existence of a clear and comprehensive regulatory framework governing the legality of euthanasia in Malaysia.
SETTING: Medical ethics education has become common, and the integrated ethics curriculum has been recommended in Western countries. It should be questioned whether there is one, universal method of teaching ethics applicable worldwide to medical schools, especially those in non-Western developing countries.
OBJECTIVE: To characterise the medical ethics curricula at Asian medical schools.
DESIGN: Mailed survey of 206 medical schools in China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Korea, Mongolia, Philippines, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Australia and New Zealand.
PARTICIPANTS: A total of 100 medical schools responded, a response rate of 49%, ranging from 23%-100% by country.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The degree of integration of the ethics programme into the formal medical curriculum was measured by lecture time; whether compulsory or elective; whether separate courses or unit of other courses; number of courses; schedule; total length, and diversity of teachers' specialties.
RESULTS: A total of 89 medical schools (89%) reported offering some courses in which ethical topics were taught. Separate medical ethics courses were mostly offered in all countries, and the structure of vertical integration was divided into four patterns. Most deans reported that physicians' obligations and patients' rights were the most important topics for their students. However, the evaluation was diverse for more concrete topics.
CONCLUSION: Offering formal medical ethics education is a widespread feature of medical curricula throughout the study area. However, the kinds of programmes, especially with regard to integration into clinical teaching, were greatly diverse.