I chose the topic of euthanasia because this topic has recently provoked a lot of controversy and debate all over the world. The question of whether euthanasia is right or wrong or whether it should be legalised or not is one the majority wish to be left alone. The topic has ignited considerable debate as a result of recent publicity about changes to the existing laws. This has forced the discussion to a much wider audience. This topic has raised a lot of queries in my head, to which I am still looking for answers.
Active and Passive Euthanasia by James Rachels
The author argues counter to the custom doctrine which prohibits a doctor from performing any action that would contribute to the patient’s death. Rachels says that the act would lead to more suffering if physicians abide by the doctrine. The author sees no moral distinction between the two types of euthanasia; active and passive euthanasia since both acts intend to end a life. He argues that letting an individual die is morally the same as killing the individual.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The Wrongfulness of Euthanasia by J. Gay-Williams
The author base his arguments against euthanasia from three different perspectives; nature, self-interest, and practical effects. He argues that the practice of euthanasia is against human nature and thus morally wrong. From the standpoint of self-interest, he claims that practising euthanasia will make individuals work against their interests. His supports this argument by stating that there is a likelihood of misprognosis, the prospect of advance in a medical procedure and that thinking of the act might make an individual give up fast. The author also argues that cases of euthanasia have an unbecoming impact on the nurses as well as the doctors. He supports this argument by saying that the physicians might not try harder to save an individual.
Voluntary Active Euthanasia by Dan W. Brock
Brock delves into the arguments for and against euthanasia in this article. He views that, the personal well-being of the patient and control over his/her future, outweighs by far any impact it may or may not have on the society. The author outlines the reasons for supporting euthanasia which include; autonomy, self-determination, and individual well-being. He argues that individuals have an inherent right in decision making. Brock also gives the good outcomes associated with legalising euthanasia which includes; I) personal autonomy is respected, II)it will relieve pain or suffering, and III) offers reassurance to an individual who would want to have euthanasia in the future. The adverse outcomes include; I) carrying out the act would be incompatible with the physician’s moral centre, and therefore the physicians would be feared by their patients, II) Euthanasia would weaken the respect for life, and III) when euthanasia is permitted it would lead down a smooth slope to involuntary euthanasia.
Euthanasia by Philippa Foot
In her article, Philippa Foot tries to prove that the act of euthanasia is permissible if the deed is done for the right reasons. She defines euthanasia as “a matter of opting for death for the good of one who is about to die.” (Foot, 1977). Foot describes four types of euthanasia in her article; active, passive, voluntary, non-voluntary euthanasia. She justifies that euthanasia can be accepted morally if intended for the right reasons. However, Foot doesn’t precisely support euthanasia s she feels that euthanasia would be abused. She thinks people ought to be keen as far as legalising the act is concerned.
Killing and Allowing to Die by Daniel Callahan
Callahan explores the concept of euthanasia in this article. Callahan states that these issues are related by three fundamental turning points: I) the legal conditions under which an individual can terminate his/her life, II) meaning as well as limits of self-determination, and III) the claim such acts make upon the institution of medicine. Callahan argues that it is wrong to utilise the skills and talents of a doctor to achieve the vision of a patient. He believes that the physician role is to save lives. Callahan feels that there is a distinction between killing and letting die. He supports this by stating that there is a distinction between removing a patient from a life support machine and injecting the patient. The author feels that this distinction ought to remain because if it doesn’t the physicians will have to carry the moral burden of the death.
References
Foot, P. (1977). Euthanasia. [Online]. Available at: https://lforliberty.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/foot-euthanasia.pdf . Accessed 9 th Sept 2018.
