Euthanasia AO2 and Essay Plans

Question 1

Strengths of Natural Law and Euthanasia

Answer 1

• as we are created in God’s image, we are special and occupy a special place in creation, natural law accounts for the importance of human life.
• The key precept states that it is natural to favour life, This reflects our biological nature as humans to protect our own lives , and as euthanasia goes against this it is against our evolutionary nature and as such, Natural Law’s position is justified by evolutionary biology.
• Proportionalism, created by Maguire and Hoose can bring a great deal more flexibility to Natural Law, in this case the y state that euthanasia is the lesser of two evils, however, this is contrary to the Natural Law position and would only be acceptable in very extreme cases.
• The doctrine of double effect can bring a great deal of flexibility to an otherwise rigid theory. It allows for people’s life support to be turned off, and other forms of passive euthanasia to be carried out such as administering pain killers where there is no chance of remission.
• prevents the slippery slope.
• applicable to all times as it is built on unchanging principles
• requires a belief in God, irrelevant to those who do not believe in the Christian belief, secularists.

Question 2

Weaknesses of Natural Law and Euthanasia

Answer 2

• The fact that natural law accepts the removal of extraordinary measures suggests that it is right to allow a shortening of lives of people who are in extreme pain and therefore it is not illegal to shorten this pain in other, less passive ways.
• Through enshrining the importance of the sanctity of live, natural law creates an unjust situation by forcing people to spend the end of their lives in pain. As such the law should respect the autonomy of the individual over any other theory based on the sanctity of life.
• When natural law was created, medical care was on avery different level, now humans are expected to live longer than anyone of Aquinas’ day and is therefore not applicable to a modern situation.
• The claim of natural law and vitalism is that there is a slippery slope is not supported by recent experiences of countries such as Switzerland who do allow euthanasia.
• Natural Law condemns people to an embarrassing and painful death that is simply because their bodies are functioning, but not because they have any other reason for living.
• focus on sanctity of life means that the concepts of quality of life and individual authority not seen as important- no sovereignty (vs Mill “over his own body and mind individual is sovereign)

Question 3

Strengths of Situation Ethics and Euthanasia

Answer 3

• It has the welfare and the happiness of people at heart, it does not cling to unreasonable ideological positions in the face of extreme pain and suffering.
• It respects the autonomy of the individual as the most important thing to consider in an ethical situation.
• In the context of Christianity, Fletcher felt that the church must serve society and must be more open to the passion exemplified by Christ.
• It is a far more balanced view than Natural Law, it accepts that both motives and consequences play an important part in the decision making, especially regarding euthanasia
• It is pragmatic and flexible, and so can be applied to many different situations and to people with different beliefs without losing it’s relevance.
• flexible to individual situations, recognising no two scenarios are the same, appeal to a wider society.
• increasingly secular society=quality of life more important than the concept of it’s sanctity.

Question 4

Weaknesses of Situation Ethics and Euthanasia

Answer 4

• Situation Ethics works well for an individual decision but by attempting to base legislation on it undermines the clarity and absolute nature of the law, opening the system to abuse.
• It is too presumptive that people who feel the need for euthanasia are in the right state of mind to make such a decision.
• As situation ethics is a consequentialist theory it relies far too heavily on the ability to accurately predict future events, with euthanasia this is particularly relevant regarding remission of the terminal diseases.
• It also has a disregard for the accumulated wisdom of existing laws, and lacks the consistency they provide.
• It is far too individualistic and egocentric, it lacks the universal application and enforceability of other theories and is the product of a permissive society, not the Christian tradition.
• It allows for the possibility of coercion and pressuring vulnerable people to take place, as human nature is too self-interested to do the right thing in cases such as this.
• It is not at all Christian, as it allows evil to be done and achieve a good result, contrary to the commandments of God.