Introduction
The practices of euthanasia and physical assisted suicide involve complicated and divisive ethical issues. Euthanasia is the deliberate taking of another person’s life to eliminate their misery. Euthanasia ethics are frequently discussed in relation to medical treatment and end-of-life choices. In order to provide an account of possible arguments on the issue, certain influential moral theories will be weighed regarding their possible stance on the practice of euthanasia. Moreover, the following arguments in favor of and against euthanasia will be reviewed: the principles of self-determination and obligation to help those in need, as well as the morality and the slippery slope implications. Ultimately, the choice to permit euthanasia and bodily assisted suicide must be carefully considered and deliberated, taking into account a number of ethical and practical issues.
Discussion
A closer look reveals that the major ethical theories offer multiple perspectives on euthanasia. According to a utilitarian viewpoint, the morality of physical assisted suicide and euthanasia depends on their capacity to bring about the most happiness for the most people. Therefore, it is important to consider if the passing of the patient would constitute a net loss in happiness, as a dead person will not have any more happiness in the future. On the other hand, Kantian ethics would focus on the rights and dignity of the individual. This perspective hinges on whether those in vegetative state can be considered individuals: if they can, then it is unacceptable to make a decision of this kind on their behalf. Finally, the natural law theory would assess whether euthanasia is consistent with the inherent dignity and worth of human life and the natural course of life and death. This seems to be the only theory with a singular viewpoint on the issue, as the followers of this approach, such as Costello, argue that it is incompatible with euthanasia (22). However, other than the natural law theory, most ethical theories can be used for justifying either viewpoint.
As for the common arguments in favor of euthanasia, the main one is the principle of self-determination. From this angle, permitting euthanasia can be viewed as respecting a person’s right to determine how they want to pass away. Euthanasia advocates contend that people should have the freedom to decide how they want to live their lives and die, and that denying them access to euthanasia is an infringement on their autonomy. Another argument in favor is based on the principle of obligation to help those in need. Euthanasia should be permitted if it can be viewed as a kind and compassionate act to end a person’s suffering in order to stop needless suffering. These two moral principles constitute the basis of the argument in favor.
Nonetheless, there are also many arguments against euthanasia. As all human life is inherently valuable and should be protected, many are opposed to euthanasia, as they view it to be incompatible with this belief. Moreover, another driving argument is the fear of the potential slippery slope that would occur if euthanasia would become common. It stems from worry about possible exploitation and abuse of the procedure. Euthanasia opponents claim that legalizing it could result in circumstances where weak people are forced to end their lives or where it is exploited as a way to avoid painful or expensive medical treatment. Euthanasia may be used to oppress certain demographics, such as the elderly or the disabled, and may result in abuses of power and authority.
Conclusion
Overall, the ethics of euthanasia and physical assisted suicide are complex and nuanced, with multiple arguments for and against. Different philosophical perspectives such as utilitarianism, Kantian ethics, and the natural law ethics may offer different insights and conclusions on their moral permissibility. Ultimately, the decision on whether to allow euthanasia and physical assisted suicide must take into account a variety of ethical and practical considerations, and must be made with careful consideration and deliberation.
Work Cited
Costello, Michael M. “Natural Law and Its Implications for Medical Assistance-In-Dying.” The Journal of International Management Studies, vol. 13, no. 1, 2018, pp. 17-22.
