Here, they may feel as if they are a burden to their relatives and therefore desire to die with an aim of cutting down on the expenses. His theory succeeds in excluding actions such as euthanasia among those that are universally acceptable. Physician-assisted Suicide: Right to Die You may have heard of Physician-assisted suicide before, but what exactly is it? Euthanasia also destroys the normal doctor-patient relationship, essay against euthanasia. He says that personal autonomy is paramount and should be respected. While many people view the right to die as basic human right euthanasia can raise moral questions, too. Non-faith-based arguments against essay against euthanasia suicide and euthanasia.
Related topics
There are many approaches to the concept and practice of euthanasia. In one definition, euthanasia is described as a quick death in which pain is almost absent. However, some countries allow euthanasia to be performed on individuals on their own consent or with the approval of a next of kin, essay against euthanasia. Euthanasia has been a subject of arguments among religious authorities. It has also been a subject of controversy and study in the complex field of philosophy. Some of the philosophies revolve around the extent to which life may not be worth living, while other theories revolve around the duty of the parties involved in a case of euthanasia.
Deontology has been against euthanasia from many perspectives. Many ethicists and authors who have used deontology against euthanasia have relied on the concept of duty. Philosophical deontology revolves around principles of duty. One is obligated to perform duties even when odds are against success. There are various forms of philosophical deontology. One of the most popular approaches to deontology is the Kantian philosophy of duty, essay against euthanasia. Other authors such as Brian Kane have indirectly used deontology to present essay against euthanasia argument favoring preservation of life.
Thus, when deontology is applied to euthanasia, it revolves around the duty to preserve life. According to Kant, one must not lie to a potential murderer to alleviate an almost certain act of murder. Deontology provides one of the strongest arguments against euthanasia. However, essay against euthanasia, in the quest to establish an argument against euthanasia, it is necessary to have a positive attitude towards living. From that point, it is possible to establish essay against euthanasia solid argument against euthanasia using deontology. Brian Kane uses Hippocratic philosophy to argue against euthanasia. When one performs the contrary action of killing, then this is considered murder. There is an exception of those people who are killed for their transgressions against ethical principles of a society.
Thus, killing for any other reason, including mercy, is murder. On the contrary, the ability to extend life and heal diseases and other afflictions has been acquired by humanity through laborious research and enlightenment. Thus, it is our duty to preserve life rather than kill. Kane observes that killing does not change its nature even when technology and modern medicine are used to camouflage the negligence of duty behind euthanasia. He later argues that even Christian doctrines and other religious beliefs consider life it all its different forms, a sanctified gift from God. In that case, euthanasia is considered a betrayal of the person under care. The decision to perform a mercy killing on a suffering individual is abandonment of a person with whom the medic performing the euthanasia has shown immeasurable solidarity earlier by essay against euthanasia care and support.
On the other hand, Kantian deontology has its own special argument against euthanasia. All aspects of Kantian philosophy revolve around duty, goodwill and categorical imperative, the philosophy of pure reason. One should observe duties at all time despite the odds. In one illustration, Kant argues that it is immoral to lie to a murderer in order to alleviate occurrence of the murder. He argues that lying to anyone denies one the freedom to make a rational deduction. In the case of euthanasia, Kantian philosophy can be applied to imply that we must preserve life at all costs. This has led to development of modern medicine, which is a universal practice. For this reason, it is a universal duty for everybody to work towards extending life in its various forms regardless of the situation.
Doing so would go against the duty to preserve life. These people have been charged with the duty to preserve life through application of technology and modern medicine. This universally accepted practice is applied in all societies in the world. A medic should thus, not perform euthanasia under any circumstances, essay against euthanasia. In addition, the medic must go essay against euthanasia the furthest extent in his or her quest to observe the duty to preserve life. Essay against euthanasia philosophy can also be applied from another perspective to the same effect. Kantian deontology directly addresses the issue of duty to oneself.
The same kind of reasoning is applied to suicide. In fact, suicide is not acceptable in many societies, essay against euthanasia. Similarly, it is universally unacceptable to take any life since it goes against ones duty as it is universally defined. If it were universally acceptable that people can take their own lives, then there would be a significant possibility that the human race would not exist. This is a deduction by Immanuel Kant in Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals. Kant lays a strong foundation for deontology, particularly regarding professional conduct in all disciplines. According to Kant, deontology opposes any action that goes against universally accepted norms.
Deontology explicitly outlines the universal purpose of medicine, essay against euthanasia, technology and medical personnel, which is to preserve life. For this reason, it is immoral for anyone to assist any individual to die for whatever reason. Another author, Robert Young, considers euthanasia as a rational act by qualified personnel to end suffering of a patient. He says that it is prudent for a qualified medic to induce death or allow a patient to die to alleviate pain and suffering. For such an action to be morally acceptable, the euthanasia should not have a beneficial effect to any other person other than the patient.
Thus, euthanasia is performed for the sake of the suffering individual, essay against euthanasia. He maintains that the decision to perform euthanasia should be a result of an assessment by a qualified person. Young also excludes cases of people who are such an invalid state that they are not in a position to decide whether to have euthanasia performed or not For a case of euthanasia to be of moral value, essay against euthanasia, the patient must request for the procedure, and the medic involved must be in a position to assess the condition of the patient and ascertain that the patient indeed suffering. Young further cites David Essay against euthanasia, who sought to append moral justification to suicide.
He says that personal autonomy is paramount and should be respected, essay against euthanasia. Thus, euthanasia should be morally acceptable when it is done within certain defined moral guidelines that involve the authority of the subject to euthanasia. David Hume dismissed religious authorities as unfair to those people who committed suicide by denying them the freedom to choose not to live when life becomes unbearable. Thus, under certain circumstances, essay against euthanasia, euthanasia is acceptable according to Young.
It is impossible for any medic, however competent, to accurately determine the validity essay against euthanasia extent of suffering of any individual. For this reason, I disagree with his proposition that some experts are able to determine when life becomes unbearable. Furthermore, essay against euthanasia, it is the duty of the medic to prolong life regardless of the utterances and expressions of the patient. This is justified by the fact that no one can accurately assess the mental situation of another person. There are several strengths and weaknesses in the theories pertaining euthanasia as presented by Kant, Kane and Young. In that case, a medic observes duty without allowing emotional consequences to alter the course of his or her actions.
This way, the medical practitioner is able to give service to the suffering people objectively. However, essay against euthanasia, Kane has postulated that the sole duty essay against euthanasia obligation of the medical profession is to prolong life when it s possible to do so. He has not adequately tried to exclude euthanasia essay against euthanasia one of the duties the medics have to perform. In addition, he has not presented facts that adequately support the theory that the duty of medical practitioners is to prolong life, essay against euthanasia.
On the other hand, Kant defines actions of moral value as those that are universally acceptable. His theory succeeds in excluding actions such as euthanasia among those that are universally acceptable. This is important since it prevents humans from engaging in morally questionable practices. He simply seeks to avoid approving actions that have moral doubt for universal practice. Even vices such as murder are not universally condemned since there are societies where they are accepted. Primitive societies, even in developed nations, have occasionally accepted murder as an action with moral value. It cannot be preservation of life is not a universal practice acceptable to all societies. Some societies allow people to perform euthanasia based on age or ailment. It may essay against euthanasia beneficial to those who are living by sparing them the ordeal of seeing a person to whom they are emotionally connected suffer.
However, essay against euthanasia, there is a major weakness in the definition of qualified personnel competent enough to perform euthanasia, essay against euthanasia. It is impossible to assess the effects of death since no one knows what follows once one is pronounced clinically dead. No single experiment has succeeded in establishing the experience after death. Whether the experience is painful or not euthanasia relies on an assumption. Furthermore, as mentioned earlier, essay against euthanasia, it is impossible for any person to determine the degree of suffering experienced by another with accuracy.
Similarly, it impossible to establish the motive of the subject to euthanasia in requesting for a mercy killing. Thus, while the medic performing the procedure might have goodwill, he or she might be an accessory to achieve other motives other than alleviation of pain. Both authors refer to universal practices. On the other hand, Kane observes that it is the universal duty of medical practitioners to prolong life whenever it is possible. These two theories come to a consensus that universal pratices have a moral value. Thus if the universal duty of medical practitioners is aimed at prolonging life, it is only morally right to work towards achievement of this objective rather than act otherwise.
It is morally unacceptable to assist anyone to die according to the direct analysis of the issue by Brian Kane. Similarly, Application of Kantian deontology automatically makes euthanasia immoral. He does not append any moral value to euthanasia without the consent of the subject. This essay against euthanasia involves creation of standard to assess the level of qualification of a medical practitioner to determine the degree of suffering of a potential subject of euthanasia. Although such a standard is difficult to establish, it is a necessity for euthanasia of people with the consent of the subject to be universally accepted as a duty of medical practitioners.
good persuasive essay topic
Here, they may feel as if they are a burden to their relatives and therefore desire to die with an aim of cutting down on the expenses. However, the truth is every person desires to see their relative up to the last point of their life. In case such a patient is taken through mercy killing, the relatives will live with a guilty conscious wondering whether their loved one could have survived if they were not given the lethal injection. By all means possible, the life of a patient should be preserved and no person should decide when it ends. The existence of palliative care and technological advancements in the medical industry proves that euthanasia is wrong.
Although there are both sides of the debate on the practice, a common agreement between the two groups is that it involves killing a patient. In such instances, doctors decide to play God and administer a lethal injection that ends the life of a patient. Although a patient may decide to receive the lethal dose, they do so out of pain and suffering, and sometimes out of concern for the medical costs involved in their care. No matter the argument put across by any group, euthanasia remains what it is: killing an innocent patient. It is morally wrong. Attell, B. Changing attitudes toward euthanasia and suicide for terminally ill persons, to an age-period-cohort analysis. OMEGA-Journal of Death and Dying , Goligher, E.
Physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia in the intensive care unit: A dialogue on core ethical issues. Crit Care Med. Saul, H. Sulmasy, D. Non-faith-based arguments against physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia. The Linacre Quarterly, 83 3 , Thesis: Despite the argument put across by both sides of the debate, euthanasia is legally and morally wrong since it disregards the value of human life. In summary, the existence of palliative care and technological advancements in the medical industry proves that euthanasia is wrong. Although there are both sides of the debate on euthanasia a common agreement between the two groups is that it involves killing a patient.
com is a leading academic writing service that is dedicated to providing extra support and help to students all over the world. In these cases, it is unfair accountable the docs for the dying of the sufferers. The Hippocratic Oath helps the doctors to understand how necessary their responsibilities are to the folks when it comes to their health. If euthanasia becomes legalized, then the effectiveness of the Hippocratic Oath shall be negated and the docs can have the option of immediately resorting to euthanasia especially in troublesome cases as a substitute of trying their finest until the very end.
Another argument against euthanasia is that it is essentially homicide as a end result of the docs will kill the affected person even when it has been accredited by the affected person himself or the household of the affected person. The only distinction is that in euthanasia, there might be mercy and consent involved while in homicide there might be none Tulloch If murder is prohibited by law because individuals take matters into their own arms and kill others, then euthanasia must also be banned because medical doctors take matters into their own hands and kill their patients even if there is consent from the sufferers and their households or relatives. Lastly, the continued enhancements and improvements in the area of medication and health care make euthanasia illogical to be carried out as an choice.
The reason why medical experts continue to work exhausting to give you improved medical technologies, medicines and therapy methods is that they need to be positive that the sick persons are able to recover quicker and wholesome individuals become even healthier. All of those efforts are being carried out to make the society turn out to be more productive because of the presence of healthy and strong individuals McDougall Instead of giving up the doctors should help them. Some positive outcomes of getting help is being happy with their family , they will die with finish business, happy memories, basically they will die happy and feeling like they have nothing to worry about.
People should always die like they have nothing left to do in this crazy world, people should die peacefully. Patients should have someone helping them everyday while there in the hospital. Especially when they want to die. People and patients still have a whole day with family they need to see and talk with before they want to take their life into risk. Euthanasia is an another word for murder but with just permission. The patient gives up and asks the doctor s to stick an injection or something else to kill them. Euthanasia was legalized in Netherland on November The second chamber of the dutch Parliament accepted the proposal for a law regarding legalization of euthanasia and assistance of suicide. The proposal will now go to the First Chamber , which will probably discuss it in early In the bible there are some verses against murder euthanasia.
Do not be like cain, who belonged to the evil one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his own actions were evil and his brother were righteous.
No comments:
Post a Comment