Euthanasia Flashcards
Voluntary Euthanasia
life is ended at their request or with their consent .
Example:Daniel James (paralysed from the neck down after a rugby accident) his parents should be liable because they
assisted in his travel to the Dignitas clinic in Switzerland
Non- voluntary Euthanasia
decision to die is made on behalf of the patient who is otherwise unable to make that decision
Example: Tony Bland was injured in the Hillsborough stadium disaster, and after a lengthy legal debate the machine that was keeping him
alive was finally switched off.
Aquinas natural law
absolute moral law which we can access by using reason. If God designed us then it follows
that to behave naturally (i.e. the way God intended) is ‘good’
Natural Law purpose
recognises that everything is created for a purpose. Aquinas believed that our purpose is to reflect the image of
God. Even if we are suffering terribly or very close to death, we are still alive and still have the potential to reflect God, so
euthanasia in all its forms is wrong.
Primary precepts
Primary Precepts which seem intrinsic to our human nature, one of which
is to preserve life, another to live harmoniously. If we use our God-given ability to reason, then we can work out (using ratio)
whether euthanasia is right or wrong and devise for ourselves a secondary precept.
Double effect
recognise that it is sometimes necessary to commit a good act with a bad consequence. This is known as
double effect. In the case of euthanasia, it is possible that a patient may require a lethal dose of drugs administered to alleviate
their pain. The original intention was to prevent suffering but death is an unfortunate by-product. What is important is that the
intention is good and not evil. To kill someone is evil, but to alleviate their pain is good.
Strenghs NL
Natural Law upholds the sanctity of human life and defends the rights of the
elderly, handicapped or terminally ill. All human life is designed by God for a
purpose. If someone is close to death or severely disabled they are still
valuable human beings because they can reflect the image of God.
Double effect does put the needs of the patient first in critical situations. It is
important that they do not suffer unnecessarily and Natural Law recognises
that pain relief is essential.
Similarly a more proportionate, weak sanctity of life approach recognises that
it is acceptable to allow someone to die rather than prolong their discomfort.
It is never acceptable to kill.
Weaknesses NL
By claiming that a person is “sacred” (i.e designed by God for a purpose)
followers of Natural Law may cause or prolong suffering. Peter Singer, a
Utilitarian, thinks that it is better to concern ourselves with decisions which
will cause less suffering and more pleasure. He argues that killing someone is
not wrong if that is what the patient wants.
Even if we apply the weak sanctity of life argument, the implication is that we
have no autonomy – that our life belongs to God, and that we must fulfil the
purpose for which we were designed.
Situation Ethics
relativist approach to Christian Ethics. Joseph Fletcher, writing in the 1960’s, felt that Natural Law, or living
by the laws in the Bible, was too legalistic.
Fletchers compromise
where the only absolute rule was agape or unconditional love. If a person is in great pain and
has no quality of life then it is surely the most loving thing to help them to die ?
Fletchers argument
Situation ethics is teleological in that it is concerned for the most loving outcome. Fletcher argues that the ends justify the
means. In the case of assisted suicide the patient can choose a dignified death, and the family are spared the distress of watching
a loved one suffer and deteriorate
four working principles
- PRAGMATISM: Euthanasia results in a dignified death, and the family are spared a protracted and difficult wait.
- RELATIVISM: Killing is neither right nor wrong – it depends on the situation
- POSITIVISM: Helping someone die is right because your loving intention is bringing about an end to their pain. It is an
act of love and this is intrinsically good. - PERSONALISM The patient and their family is more important than unquestioning obedience to the Ten
Commandments
Fletcher example
‘Sacrificial Suicide’ where a terminal patient refuses drugs to prolong his life because he knows that
his life insurance will soon run out. If he dies soon then his wife and children will be able to claim insurance money. Fletcher
argues that this is a loving decision.
Strenghs SE
Situation Ethics treats us like grown ups ! We are not simply given rules to
obey, but we are asked to use our reason, and think how best love can be
served
Situation ethics is more flexible than the hard line interpretation of Natural
Law. Although Aquinas’ Natural Law is proportionalist, the Catholic
interpretation is very prescriptive (telling us what to do), and many people
are hesitant to break the rules.
Weaknesses SE
Situation Ethics relies on us agreeing over what is the most loving thing to do
in a particular circumstance. Making such a decision over euthanasia could
seem impossible for many people because they will not know what is the best
course of action. How does one define ‘love’ ? Consider the case of Charlie
Gard – the baby whose parents wanted to fly him to America because there
was a very slim chance that a new treatment could prolong his life. The
Doctors at Great Ormond Street would not allow this because they thought his
death was immanent and that travel would be too distressing.
Situation Ethics does not define what is meant by a ‘situation’. Where do we
draw the line? For example, the family of a patient in a coma with no
prospective quality of life might feel that they are doing the right thing in
asking for active non-voluntary euthanasia, but they must also consider wider
implications . . . Will elderly or terminally ill people fear going into hospital
because their family/doctors can decide to end their lives ? This is not a very
loving outcome.
