1.5 Euthanasia Flashcards
IN PROGRESS
active euthanasia
a treatment is given that directly causes the death of the individual
linguistic origin of euthanasia?
meaning a ‘good death’ from the Greek ‘eu’ meaning good and ‘thanatos’ meaning death
passive euthanasia
the withdrawal of treatment that is keeping a patient alive
voluntary euthanasia
a person chooses to be euthanised
non-voluntary euthanasia
where a severely or terminally ill person’s life is ended without their consent as they are unable to give consent
involuntary euthanasia
when a person is able to give consent but they are euthanised without their pemission
what three bible quotes are often given to support the principle of sanctity of life?
- ‘so God created humankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them’ - Genesis
- ‘you shall not murder’ - Exodus, part of the ten commandments
- ‘the Lord gave, and the Lord has taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord’ - Job
what does Peter Singer argue should replace the traditional sanctity of life ethics?
five quality of life commandments
1. recognise that the worth of human life varies
2. take responsibility for the consequences of your decisions
3. respect a pesron’s desire to live or die
4. bring children into the world only if they are wanted
5. do not discriminate on the basis of species
what is the sanctity of life
- a religious view
- sees the instrinsic value of life
- supported by natural law
- absolute
what is quality of life
- a secular view
- instrumental view
- supported by situation ethics and utilitarianism
- conditional upon the situation
what do supporters of euthanasia often point to
- autonomy, we have a right to choose what to do with our bodies
- can be seen in Mil’s harm principle
- checks out for voluntary euthanasia but can be tricky for non-voluntary such as in the case of Tony Bland when he was unable to give consent… could lead to slippery slope?
how did Jonathon Glover comment on allowing euthanasia?
- argued there should be several checks on whether someone should be assisted to die
- external judgment on the persons quality of life as well as their mental state
what is the hippocratic oath?
i will neither give a deadly drug to anybody if asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to that affect
difference between an act and an omission though?
James Rachels comment on euthanasia?
- questions whether the difference between actively killing and passively letting someone die is helpful
- someone is to inherit a fortune if their nephew dies, he either drowns him in the bath as an ‘act’ or watches his nephew drown and does nothing about it as an ‘omission’
- is there really a difference, legally yes but morally?
Jonathon Glover’s comment on acts vs omission?
- argues the distinction between act and omissions is not so clear cut, similar to Rachels
- highlights the complexity of euthanasia
- instead there are five options for euthanasia:
1. take all possible steps to preserve life
2. tale all ordinary steps to preserve life but don’t use extraordinary means
3. not killing but taking no steps to preserve life
4. an act, not intended to kill, has death as a possible consequence
5. the deliberate act of killing
what is another way in which acts and omissions become complicated?
- highlighted by Singer
- used the example of the Tony Bland case
- was the removal of the feeding tube an act as it led to his death or an omission as he was no longer feeding him not directly killing him
three arguments natural law provides a good answer to euthanasia?
- it upholds the intrinsic value of life and focuses on the sanctity of life
- pretty straightforward and prevents the ambiguities and confusions that come with situation ethics as deontological theory
- prevents humans from abusing power over others
two arguments natural law does not give a good answer to euthanasia?
- its religious foundations make it seem outdated in an increasingly secular world - quality over sanctity
- it is legalistic and shows no compassion to the pain and suffering experienced by terminally ill people
two strengths of situation ethics for euthanasia?
- it is flexible to individual situations and recognises that no two are the same, particularyl relevant when talking about acts v omissions
- agape love, if correctly understood, is about ensuring the best posisble outcome for the persons involved
two weaknesses for situation ethics for euthanasia?
- potentially ‘do the most loving thing’ can be vague and too simplistic for such complex situations, could end up just being a matter of opinion
- it has the same weaknesses as utilitarianism, requires a prediction of the future etc.
what modern philosophers are opposed to euthanasia?
Daniel Callahan
- 21st century American philosopher
- opposed to euthanasia on the grounds of sanctity of life, says that it undermines societal respect for life in general
John Keown
- defended the sanctity of life
- pointed out the slippery slope to involuntary euthanasia
Paul Ramsey
- also sanctity of life
- stressed the importance of care without intentionally causing death
JS Mill
- harm principle
- although there arises difficulties about to what extent this does harm others
- also doesn’t address the issue of involuntary/non-voluntary euthanasia
Derek Humphry
- contemporary American journalist
- founder of organisations advocating for the right to die with dignity
- he has written extensively on the topic of euthanasia and assisted dying and particularly emphasises the choice to alleviate the suffering of terminally ill individuals
