Abortion and Euthanasia
Skill AO2, Faced wt these issues, explain the different ways Christians might respond. (AO2 Lifestyle)
Faced with these issues, explain the different ways Christians might respond.
Abortion and euthanasia are the most controversial topics faced by the world today, people hold different views about them some are in favour whilst some are against it. In this coursework I will try to explain the different views about the abortion and euthanasia and will end all this by stating my own opinion on what I feel about abortion and euthanasia.
First let us look at abortion:
Abortion
Abortion can be defined as "Premature expulsion of the foetus from the womb either done by operation or by medication"
The meaning of abortion is quiet clear from its definition. As far as different views are concerned mostly all sects of Christianity are against the concept of abortion, there are humanitarian groups which are in favour of it, they have their own views which are totally different then the religious views, if we look at what different groups think we will find out that there is equal acceptance and opposition on the concept of abortion. The different views are given below:
Opposition:
Catholic Truth Society greatly oppose abortion, they give their reason as:
'We have been created by the almighty God in his own image and likeness. No pregnancy is unplanned because no baby can be conceived unless almighty God intends that conception and has willed that particular unique and completely individual new person into existence. What has actually happened in our society is that clever arguments has convinced those with no anchor of belief in God to cling to, that merciless slaughter of unborn babies is morally unjustifiable, and even essential for the happiness of the individual and good of the society'
The Catholic trust says that the conception of baby is due to will of God and a human being has no right to kill that baby, it is ethically unacceptable and morally wrong. Life Campaign activist believe that:
'Since human life begin at conception i.e. fertilisation, and since all human life should be equally protected by the law from conception to natural death, whether or not human being concerned is wanted or handicapped it follows that destruction of unborn life is always wrong.'
According to Life Campaign after conception foetus is a living thing and its right to live should not be taken away.
Favour:
The groups in favour of abortion are mostly humanitarian groups the have their own point of view, according to National Abortion Campaign:
'The decision to terminate pregnancy is so important that it can only be made by the person most involved- the women. Women must always have a choice and never have the decision forced upon them. Free abortion facilities should on the NHS for every woman who needs them. We believe that ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
According to Life Campaign after conception foetus is a living thing and its right to live should not be taken away.
Favour:
The groups in favour of abortion are mostly humanitarian groups the have their own point of view, according to National Abortion Campaign:
'The decision to terminate pregnancy is so important that it can only be made by the person most involved- the women. Women must always have a choice and never have the decision forced upon them. Free abortion facilities should on the NHS for every woman who needs them. We believe that the right of women to control their own fertility is a fundamental human right. Women will not be able to take a full and equal part in the society when we can all decide for ourselves whether and when to have children.'
National Abortion Campaign states the basic right of women to control its own fertility, they say that women have a full right to chose when the want to have children. Humanist Dipper supports abortion by suggesting that:
'Humanist regards abortion better than bringing unwanted into the world. It is a mistake to say that Humanist are in favour of abortion; no one can be in favour of abortion, which, except in unforeseen circumstances, is result of failed contraception. We think there will probably always be a certain number unplanned pregnancies and that the mother concerned should have the complete choice of either complete abortion, or keeping the baby.'
Euthanasia
The term 'Euthanasia' comes from the Greek word for 'easy death'. It is the one of the most public policy issues being debated about today. Formally called 'mercy killing', euthanasia is the act of purposely making or helping someone die, instead of allowing nature to take it's course. Basically euthanasia means killing in the name of compassion. Euthanasia, can be 'voluntary', 'passive', 'active', or 'positive',
Voluntary involves a request by the dying patient or their legal representative. Passive involves, doing nothing to prevent death - allowing someone to die.
Positive involves taking deliberate action to cause a death.
Active involves giving a lethal dose of toxicant to cause death.
Euthanasia, at the moment is illegal throughout the world apart from in the State of Oregon in USA, where there is a law specifically allowing doctors to prescribe lethal drugs for the purpose of euthanasia. In the Netherlands it is practised widely, although, in fact, it remains illegal.
Opposition:
Majority of religions disapprove Euthanasia, Christianity disapproves it according to the belief human being have a special place in God's heart, eyes and in his creation:
"For you created my inmost being; you (God) knit me together in my mother's womb"(psalm 139)
So the alternative to euthanasia in Christianity is 'Hospice movement'. The kind of care hospice give to the patients is very distinctive for they offer tender loving care. The three aims of hospices are:
· To relieve pain.
· To enable patients and families to face up to death.
· To care for emotional needs of the relatives.
A hospice offers care to the patients and their families at the most difficult stages in their lives.
Opinion:
I believe that everyone has the right to choose how he or she live and die. Not everybody will have an easy death. Some terminal pain cannot be controlled, even with the best of care and the strongest of drugs. Other distressing symptoms, which come with diseases, such as sickness, no mobility, incontinence, breathlessness and fever cannot always be relieved. Pain is not always the issue - quality of life is too.
People should not be left lingering in pain. They should not have to suffer when death is inevitable. People do have the right to commit suicide, although it is a tragic and individual act. However euthanasia is not suicide. It is not a private act, you have the support of family and friends. Euthanasia is about letting a person assist anothers death to save them from long painful deaths.
Many people argue, however, that a person who is terminally ill may make a miraculous recovery - it has happened in the past. Most terminally ill people whose pain and sufferings are relieved by excellent care, given by hospices, hospitals and GPs do not require making decisions about euthanasia. It is only needed for those whose pain is not relived with any form of care or whose bodily disintegration is beyond bearing. Medical advances in recent years have made it possible to keep terminally ill people alive for beyond a length of time, without any hope of recovery or improvement. For this reason the 'living ill' has come into use in the USA as part of the right-to-die principle. Most states now legally allow the making of such wills that instruct, GPs etc., to suspend treatment or refuse life-support measures in hopeless cases.
A pro-longed life is intolerable for people with a condition, which leaves the brain alert but eventually shuts down all bodily functions and skills of communicating. How can people be expected to live like this? For people like this and also people in PVS, (persistent vegetative state) I believe that their legal representatives or close family should have the choice and the trust to let them live a prolonged life or to end their life and let them die with dignity. If people could make the decision themselves then I believe that the option of euthanasia should be open to them.
On the other hand, people believe that no one has the right to play God.
Christians believe that
'We are made in the image of God and therefore human life is God's gift to us and is uniquely precious - we are not the owners of life, but it's minders',
We belong to God because he made us. Many religions follow this belief; so do not believe in suicide and assisted dying.
The opposition to euthanasia does not mean that people insist on medical treatment at all costs. Good medical practise is the alternative to euthanasia. Sometimes a distinction is made between active euthanasia (e.g. Giving a lethal injection) and positive euthanasia (withdrawing treatment). However it is misleading to describe withholding or discontinuing treatment as 'euthanasia' unless it is done with the intention of killing the patient. Sometimes a treatment may be properly withdrawn even with the patient's consent, for example, when it is ineffective, merely prolonging the dying process in a terminally ill patient.
A lot of people believe that if voluntary euthanasia were legalised, society would soon allow involuntary euthanasia. This is based on the idea that if we change the law to allow a person to help someone die, we would not be able to control it. If there was to be a law like this, there would have to be strict rules, which involved the patient having knowledge of the whole process, making sure they are not forced into it and also that they are mentally able to make the decision.
So, should we allow people the choice of when they die? The debate about euthanasia props up all the time, even when it is not publicised, it is still happening secretly all the time. As an issue euthanasia refuses to die. Everyone has their own opinion on it, with many people wanting to see a change in the law.
When finally that person dies, their relatives' good memories may be overrun by the memories of that persons last few days of agony and misery, when all they could do was watch them suffer and loose dignity.
Legally, euthanasia is against the law. Simply put is it murder. The law is established by the religious and moral arguments, remembering that one of the Ten Commandments is
'Thou shalt not kill'.
This issue needs a lot of thought. Many people agree with voluntary euthanasia, many disagree but there is also a large amount of people undecided on the matter. The time will come when the Government and medical services will have to open their eyes to euthanasia, and there will be a lot of debate on the subject. Until then the euthanasia debate will continue to linger, like a terminal disease.
