Evaluate the ethical argument for and against keeping a person alive against his or her will.

Authors Avatar

Evaluate the ethical argument for and against keeping a person alive against his or her will.

In the majority of countries today there is an existing law that states if a patient suffering from an incurable illness or from unbearable pain, asks their doctor to help end their lives, then they are putting them in a position to be charged with murder. Those that are in favour of voluntary euthanasia believe that this law should be abolished because they feel the patient should not have to suffer. In the Netherlands this law in not in forced and doctors are able quite openly to relieve a suffering patient and have been able to do so since the 1980’s. In Holland it is believed that approximately one thousand assisted deaths occur in one year. The issue of euthanasia has been recognised for a very long time. The moral philosopher Hippocrates said ‘I will not prescribe a deadly drug to please someone, nor give advice that may cause his death’. Euthanasia is frowned upon by many people, as it is a criminal offence in nearly all countries and strongly opposed to by governments and religious organisations.

        

Arguments for voluntary euthanasia state that it is not murder if the patient does not want to live. It cannot be wrong to relieve someone from excruciating pain if it is his or her desire to die. It is believed by some that the act of euthanasia shows mercy to those suffering intolerable pain or from an incurable disease. Voluntary euthanasia allows competent adults to decide whether they want to live or die and so they should be granted the dignity to make this decision for themselves. Preference utilitarianism points in favour of euthanasia as it claims that its principles are an acceptable argument as  ‘a desire to go on living as a reason against killing, so it must count a desire to die as a reason for killing’. The classical utilitarian objection does not deal with the action of killing but the genuine consent of the patient. This argument states that if voluntary euthanasia is not permitted than we may be fearful that the way in which we die will be slow and painful.

There is a strong religious argument against voluntary euthanasia, which claims that life is a sacred gift from God and so it is the duty of humans to make it fruitful and preserve it. The Hebrew Scriptures forbid euthanasia and Christians hold that suffering is part of God’s plan because Jesus suffered on the cross and so pain is just a way of life and something we all must endure. Other arguments that exist against euthanasia such as the theory that we may ask to die in a moment of despair but really be of sound mind when the request is made. The system of euthanasia may be subject to criticism by the relatives or friends of the patient.

Join now!

Some argue that there is no moral difference between the withdrawal of treatment and the active killing of a patient by lethal injection. The consequences of legalising euthanasia are uncertain and so many are sceptical about it, there would undoubtedly be flaws in the systems that may regulate the practice. We cannot predict the impact that voluntary euthanasia may have on some peoples perceptions of hospitals or the idea of an elderly person leading them to believe that they are a burden. There are potential social dangers that stand against the restrictions of individual autonomy that result from prohibiting ...

This is a preview of the whole essay