Euthanasia Flashcards
“Should a person have complete authority to choose euthanasia” essay
A: Although Fletcher, Nozick would argue we should have complete authority. People should not have complete authority as can allow suicide due to temporary depression. Cannot apply in such a trumatic and stressfuk time. If your in physical nd mental agony
CA: Glover someone is not able to be autonomous if they have a diminished emotional state. Mill - particularly after the enlightenment can be left to a competent adult. People are more happy when they are given individual freedom. _Nozick - we have property rights to our own body
E: Archbishop Fisher - slippery sope - one case extended to another therefore should not have complete authority Hannah Jones
A: S.O.L - Aquinas natural law - not an ordered society. God created life. God has a plan
CA: society is less religious so we should not rely on a religious theory. Therefore QOL Singer: “we should recognise that the worth of human life varies” - therefore autonomyt
E: a doctors responsibility to treat the sick. Vunerable people may be taken advantage of or manipulated
“Critically assess the importance of sanctity of life in decisions about euthanasia”
A: SOL is still relevant as highlights the religious importance of humans. For Christians in particular - life = God’s gift. Talks directly about human life in the bible “The body is a temple”, “made in God’s image”. God has a plan for everyone so ending it early . Humans have unique value. Active euthanasia
CA: Fletcher - when agape is best served so QOL is better. Example e.g. elderly man in a lot of pain. Personalism - people are put first. QOL
E: slippery slope issue: when some forms of euthanasia permitted such as voluntary. May put pressure of groups. SOL still important as non-vol and vol euthanasia permitted if we don’t take SOL into consideration
A: Removes the chance for someone to get better if they are in a coma. Aquinas precepts - ordered society and don’t kill.
CA: SOL has no place as less than 50% are Christian. Takes away autonomy - Nozick we have property rights to our own body. SoL stops autonomy so bad. Singer replaces SOL with QOL: “we should recognise that the worth of human life varies”
E: SOL is there to prevent tragic deaths due to temporary emotions if we were to have full authority. Example of a teenager being depressed due to relationship issues. IN response to singer all have the same intrinsic value.
Euthanasia scholars and arguments
Aquinas: natural law. Believes in sanctity of life. Humans are made in the image of God, therefore we should not take away this gift.
Archbishop Anthony Fisher: makes the slippery slope argument against the QOL view. In Holland euthanasia was permitted for the terminally ill but 10 years later was legalised for babies. He also argues that if euthanasia was allowed, some older people may be tempted to take their life because they feel like a burden.
Kuhse: just scaremongering. No evidence in Netherlands
Fletcher: situation ethics, was against legalism in the bible including sanctity of life
Robinson (influence by Bonhoeffer): humanity has come of age. However now people are more civilised to the point where we should grant people more autonomy, this will increase love without risking the stability of society.
Barclay: disagrees with Robinsons view. If we granted people with freedom they wouldn’t chose the most loving thing to do. Stanford prison experiment
Catholic Church: direct euthanasia is never justified, but passive, whether voluntary or non voluntary, can be justified through the doctrine of double effect.
Peter Singer: believes the quality of life is important. Goes far as to recommend non voluntary euthanasia for babies whose potential quality of life is low.
Rachels: argued that there is no difference between active and passive euthanasia. Roman Catholics agree as it doesnt change that it is a murderous act. However DoDE
Dworkin: SoL scholar, VE. Allows people to die while maintaining a eudaemonic quality to being alive.
Mill: people should have full autonomy over actions that do not effect others. No harm principle
Glover: assisted suicide is better as it’s always better to be sure that’s what they wanted
Pense: killing someone who wants to die isn’t murder
David Alton: Dying is not only a personal or individual affair. Assisting suicide up to 14 years in prison. Against euthanasia
Euthanasia
Sanctity of life:
- The belief in the value and the sacredness of - evidence: ‘God created mankind in his own image’, ‘you shalt not murder’, ‘The lord gave and the Lord has taken away’, ‘ your bodies are the temples of the Holy Spirit’
- Catholics may place weight on the natural law teaching of preservation of life - the Church as officially pronounced against euthanasia
Quality of life:
- whether life is valuable depends on whether it is worth living.
- Singer: replaces the sanctity of life ethics with 5 quality of life commandments 1. We should recognise the worth of human life varies 2. We should take responsibility for the consequences of our decisions to save or end life 3. We should respect a persons desire to live or die 4. We should only bring children into the world if they are wanted 5. We should not discriminate on the basis of species
Natural law:
- Divine law: ‘a time to be born and a time to die’ - it is God job to bring and end life
- Goes against preserve innocent life. It could be seen as an apparent good
- Distinguishes between extraordinary and extraordinary measures: ordinary measures: basic medication, food, water. Extraordinary measures: life support.
- The DoDE may also make it permissible for a doctor to give strong pain relief such as morphine even though this carries a risk of ending the patients life
- Dr David Moor: was cleared by a court of murdering a seriously ill 85 year old who was suffering from a heat attack and a stroke. He was given a dose of morphine to relieve the agony which hastened his death. Permissible due to DoDE
Situation ethics:
- Sanctity of life is not an absolute. Rules such as ‘do not kill’ as Sophia but can be broken.
- Autonomy is important as ‘personalism’ is one of the 4 working principles..
- He states that the patients medical condition has to be the starting point for any decisions in medical ethics
- Emphasis on pragmatism - whatever we do should be whats likely to work.
- Love is justice distributed
Active vs Passive:
- Active: when a person is killed by some positive action such as a lethal injection. Situation ethics would regard active euthanasia as morally better, since it is quicker and means less suffering. SOL view would regard active and passive as equally wrong, since all life is sacred
- Passive: when no one preforms an action which results in the death of he person. E.g. removing a life support machine. The Catholic Church´s use of natural naw regards passive euthanasia as being potentially justifiable in certain circumstances under the double effect
Voluntary vs non voluntary:
- Voluntary: when a person has the mental capacity to choose euthanasia
- Non Voluntary: when someone does not have the mental capacity to choose euthanasia. Some would argue hat non voluntary euthanasia Amy be permitted in a circumstance, for example, a baby has a terminal condition that would mena they die in pain anyway.
Autonomy:
- Mill: if we wish to harm ourselves then we should be permitted to do so.
- Singer: preference util - humans should be free to peruse their own desires and interests
- Johnathan Glover: argued that external checks are also required as to someone’s state of mind. If someone is making the decision in a diminished mental state then they are not truly anonymous
- More complicated on cases of non-voluntary euthanasia - if an individual has given instructions about what their wishes would be then arguably their autonomy is being respected
- However some hospitable in 2011 where found to. Have been putting DNR on the notes of elderly patients without proper discussion
Acts and Omissions
- e.g. active vs passive euthanasia
- James Rachels: distinction between active and passive: 1. Smith - A person drowns a boy in a bathtub. 2. Jones - The boy slips and hits his head and slowly drowns. Although mos would argue that the act is worse than the omission yet Rachels disputes this. He argues that both cases are equally as bad as each other
- In the case of Tony bland the omission could be argued as more cruel then the act - e.g. taking out the feeing tube would have lead to a slow death.
- _Peter Singer has argued that it is not always easy to distinguish between an act and omission.
- Natural law would draw a distinction between acts and omissions as the key to the theory is the intention of the agent. Primary action should always be to relieve pain
- Situation ethics does not draw a great distinction between acts and omissions
