Text 4 It was 3:45 in the morning when the vot
问题详情
Text 4
It was 3:45 in the morning when the vote was finally taken. After six months of arguing and final 16 hours of hot parliamentary debates, Australia’s Northern Territory became the first legal authority in the world to allow doctors to take the lives of incurably ill patients who wish to die. The measure passed by the convincing vote of 15 to 10. Almost immediately word flashed on the Internet and was picked up, half a world away, by John Hofsess, executive director of the Right to Die Society of Canada. He sent it on via the group’s on-line service, Death NET. Says Hofsess: “We posted bulletins all day long, because of course this isn’t just something that happened in Australia. It’s world history.”
The full import may take a while to sink in. The NT Rights of the Terminally Ill law has left physicians and citizens alike trying to deal with its moral and practical implications. Some have breathed sighs of relief, others, including churches, right to life groups and the Australian Medical Association, bitterly attacked the bill and the haste of its passage. But the tide is unlikely to turn back. In Australia—where an aging population, life extending technology and changing community attitudes have all played their part—other states are going to consider making a similar law to deal with euthanasia. In the US and Canada, where the right to die movement is gathering strength, observers are waiting for the dominoes to start falling.
Under the new Northern Territory law, an adult patient can request death—probably by a deadly injection or pill—to put an end to suffering. The patient must be diagnosed as terminally ill by two doctors. After a “cooling off” period of seven days, the patient can sign a certificate of request. After 48 hours the wish for death can be met. For Lloyd Nickson, a 54 year old Darwin resident suffering from lung cancer, the NT Rights of Terminally Ill law means he can get on with living without the haunting fear of his suffering: a terrifying death from his breathing condition. “I’m not afraid of dying from a spiritual point of view, but what I was afraid of was how I’d go, because I’ve watched people die in the hospital fighting for oxygen and clawing at their masks,” he says.
56. From the second paragraph we learn that ________.
[A] the objection to euthanasia is slow to come in other countries
[B] physicians and citizens share the same view on euthanasia
[C] changing technology is chiefly responsible for the hasty passage of the law
[D] it takes time to realize the significance of the law’s passage
参考答案
正确答案:D
56. [D] 意为:理解该法获批准的意义尚需要时间。
第二段第一句是该段的主题句,该句意为:其(即这一立法的)整体含义(import)可能需要一段时间才为人彻底理解(sink in)。其实,该段的第二句是对第一句更具体的阐释,该句可译为:北部地方州(此处 NT 是Northern Territory 的缩略形式,指澳大利亚中北部地区)晚期病人权利法的批准使医生和普通人都在思索其道义与实践方面的含义。本段下文提到了支持和反对该法的两种观点。
A意为:在(除澳大利亚以外的)其他国家,对安乐死的反对意见缓慢而至。这一点该段没有提到。实际上,听到该法批准后,远在美国和加拿大的人也很快作出了反应。 B 意为:在安乐死这一问题上,医生和普通人观点相同。正像该段第三句所指出的,对于该法的批准,意见分歧很大。有些人松了口气,而有些人——包括教堂、保卫生命权益组织与澳大利亚医学会——对该法进行激烈的抨击,认为它的批准过于仓促。
C意为:技术(条件)的变化应对该法的仓促批准负主要责任。该段第五句意为:在澳大利亚,其他州也将考虑通过制定同样的一项法律来解决安乐死问题,而促成这一形势的是澳大利亚老化的人口、生命延续技术、正在变化的社会态度等因素。可见,这与 C所表达的内容不一样。