Euthanasia Flashcards
What is the Difference between VOLUNTARY and NON-VOLUNTARY Euthanaisa
VOLUNTARY - when a person’s LIFE is ENDED at their OWN REQUEST
NON VOLUNTARY - when a person’s LIFE is NOT ENDED at Their REQUEST, but by SOMEONE REPRESENTING their interests
What is the Difference between PASSIVE and ACTIVE Euthanasia
PASSIVE - a TREATMENT is WITHHELD that INDIRETLY Results in the Person’s Death
ACTIVE - TREATMENT is Given that DIRECLY CAUSES the Death of the Individual. illegal in UK
What is the SANCTITY OF LIFE
- idea that LIFE is INTRINSICALLY SACRED or VALUABLE - we are MADE in GOD’ IMAGE (genesis), inherent value
- ” Thou Shall not Murder “ (Exodus)
- MORALLY WRONG to TAKE LIFE
What is the Quality of Life
- the idea that LIFE’S VALUE DEPENDS on CERTAIN ATTRIBUTES or goods, e.g. happiness
- takes the view that WHETHER LIFE is VALUABLE DEPENDS on WEATHER it’s WORTH LIVING
Explain SINGER’S View relating to QUALITY OF LIFE and what he ARGUES
Argues for REPLACING the TRADITIONAL SANCTITY of LIFE Ethics with 5 QUALITY of LIFE COMMANDMENTS
(1) RECOGNISE that the WORTH of Human Life VARIES
(2) TAKE the RESPONSBILITY
(3) RESPECT a Person’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 AUTONOMY?
literally “SELF-RULING”, the Belief that WE ARE FREE and Able to MAKE OWN DECISIONS
Explain the Link between PREFERENCE UTILITARIANISM and AUTONOMY
argues that HUMANS should be FREE to PURSUE their Own DESIRES and INTERESTS where POSSIBLE
this Autonomy includes the RIGHT to MAKE our Own DECISIONS about our DEATH
ACTS &OMISSIONS - the Hipporactic Oath - what is the view of HIPPOCRATES
states that it WOULD be WRONG for a DOCTOR to SOMETHING that would be CAUSE the DEATH of a PERSON.
however, in others writings, he says that it is POINTLESS to CONTINUE to TREAT those who are OVERCOME by a DISEASE and for whom MEDICINE is POWERLES
What is the DIFFERENCE between an ACT and an OMISSION
an ACT which CAUSES DEATH is Morally (and legally) wrong but an OMISSION (STOPPING a TREATMENT where the treatment is prolonging the inevitable death and increasing the suffering of the patient) may not be morally
Explain RACHEL’S Experiement
to SUGGEST that the DISTINCTION between ACTIVELY KILLING and PASSIVELY LETTING SOMEONE DIE May not Helpful
Just Because SOMEONE FAILS to REPSOND to SOMEONE in NEED (omits to help) DOESN’T MEAN that THEY are BLAMELESS - Smith and Jones Analogy
- Smith (act) - drowns nephew to gain inheritance of brother
- Jones - (omission) - sees nephew drowning, does nothing and watches him drown to gain inheritance
What does GLOVER suggest about the Distinction of ACTS and OMISSIONS
the DISTINCTION between ACTS & OMISSIONS may not be so Clear Cut. This is beacause Our Actions and Our Missions may involve Ordinary and Extraordiary means depending on whether the Proposed treatment is Something Ordinary or whether it involves Highly Expressive
What are GLOVER’S 5 OPTIONS with Regard to EUTHANASIA?
- Take ALL POSITIVE STEPS to PRESERVE Life
- Take ALL ORDINARY Steps to PRESERVE Life but Not Use Extraordinary means
- NOT KILLING but Taking NO STEPS to PRESERVE Life
- An ACT which, while NOT INTENDING to KILL, has DEATH as a POSSIBLE Foreseen CONSEQUENCE
5.The DELIBERATE Act of KILLING
What is NATURAL LAW Concerned woth?
GOOD ACTIONS and the GOODNESS of THOSE Actions is determined by the EXTENT to which they ACCORD with the External Law, a law with Higher Authority, and a PROCESS of REASONING helps DETERMINE what’s RIGHT and what’s WRONG
How is NATUAL LAW OPPOSED to EUTHANASIA - through Sanctity of Life
when Applying Natural Law, the PRIMARY PRECEPTS should be RECALLED, in this case, of particular Importance is the Key Precept to DO GOOD and AVOUD EVIL & the Precept to PRESERVE LIFE, which UPHOLDS the SANCTITY of LIFE
Divine Law in Bible -> are CREATED in GOD’S IMAGE - > Purpose of human beings is to LIVE a LOVING LIFE
the CATHOLIC CHURCH’s Teaching’s Conclude that EUTHANASIA is WRONG as LIFE is SACRED and a GIFT from GOD ‘ which they are called upon to preserve make fruitful
How is NATUAL LAW OPPOSED to EUTHANASIA - DIVINE LAW
Taking of LIFE through EUTHANASIA CONTRAVENES DIVINE LAW.
endiing of life ENDS the POSSIBILITY of That PERSON BRINGING LOVE Into this WORLD, or Love being Brought by Others in RESPONSE to that PERSON
How is NATUAL LAW OPPOSED to EUTHANASIA - PRECEPTS
it ENDS the POSSIBILITY of PURSUING any of the OTHER PRECEPTS; to Educate, Live in a Community, Reproduce, Worship God
to TAKE a LIFE according to Catholic Church OPPOSES GOD’s LOVE for that person and REJECTS the DUTY of a Person to Live Life according to God’s plan
What is the relation between EUTHANASIA and Real/Apparent Goods
Euthanasia is an APPARENT GOOD, that seems to ALLIEVATE the SUFFERING of the person, but in fact it’s FAILING to RECOGNSIE a GREATER GOOD which is Related to INSTRINSIC Nature of LIFE
What are 3 Points for NATURAL LAW giving a GOOD ANSWER on Euthanasia?
- it UPHOLDS the INTRIDIC Value of LIFE
- the Prinicple of DOUBLE EFFECT gives a sensible FLEXIBILITY to Relieve PAIN
What are 3 Points for NATURAL LAW giving a BAD ANSWER on Euthanasia?
- its religious foundations make it seem outdated
- its LEGALISTIC and shows NO COMPASSION to the Pain and Suffering expereinced by many terminally ill people
- the FOCUS on SANCTITY of LIFE means that the CONCEPTS of Quality of Life and Indivudal automony are not seen as importajt
How is SITUATION ETHICS LAW OPPOSED to EUTHANASIA - PRECEPTS
SE REJECTS LEGALISM in FAVOUR of Asking WHAT is the MOST LOVING THING to DO.
Usual rules about “ Do Not Kill “ Are NOT the place to start when Making a Moral Decision - Fletcher - Can be BROKEN When LOVE DEMANDS It
Explain how SITUATION ETHICS views QUALITY of LIFE VS SANCTITY of LIFE for EUTHANAISA?
the QUALITY of LIFE was MORE IMPORTANT than the SANCTITY of LIFE
Link how it’s a relativist approach and the link of a PRESUPPOSITION and EUTHANAISA
states that LOVE’S DECISIONS are MADE SITUATIONALLY, NOT PRESCRIPTIVELY
What are 2 Points for SITUATION ETHICS giving a GOOD ANSWER on Euthanasia?
- it’s FLEXIBLE to INDIVIDUAL SITUATIONS, it Recognises that NO 2 SITUATIONS regarding EUTHANAISA ARE the SAME
- AGAPE LOVE, if correctly understood, is about ENSURING the BEST POSSIBLE OUTCOME for the PERSONS INVOLVED
What are 2 Points for SITUATION ETHICS giving a BAD ANSWER on Euthanasia?
- potentially “ DO the MOST LOVING THING “ is VAGUE ; what the Most Loving thing is may be SUBJECTIVE - a matter of OPINION or PERSEPCTIVE
- SE has a Number of Weakness of UTILITARIANISM in that it REQUIRES a PREDICITION of the FUTURE : what the MOST LOVING OUTCOME is MAY NOT be ABSOULTELY CERTAIN
