Assisted suicide, suffering and the meaning of a life (original) (raw)
Related papers
A History of Ideas Concerning Suicide, Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2005
not theology. This question of scope is not to discount the importance of such lines of inquiry concerning the relationship between faith and reason. 4 Rather, it is merely to state that the scope necessarily has to be limited to questions of what can and cannot be justified by natural reason in the light of our attempt to pose publicly accessible reasons that can, in principle, inform 'secular' morality and law in this area. 5 The history of suicide and euthanasia practices may, at first glance, seem to have only a distant influence upon the contemporary debate. Yet, the historical development of thinking on the subject is vital if we are to adequately contextualise the contemporary arguments made against traditional negative prohibitions; prohibitions that have hitherto formed the status quo in the West. 6 Being able to claim historical support lends credence to claims, especially when those figures or sources appealed to have had a significant impact on contemporary patterns of thought. 7 It is to the task of reviewing and analysing those historically rooted ideas, that I now turn. 4 Tensions with my own position concerning the relationship between faith and reason exist on two fronts: firstly, certain authors such as Ronald Dworkin blur the line between the kinds of truth that can be know by reason and kinds of truth that can be known only by an appeal to faith based considerations; secondly, there is the problem of thinkers and politicians who support the state sanctioning of religion, at least in the 'broad sense' of the Judaeo-Christian heritage. For a stimulating account of the general relationship between faith and reason, somewhat sympathetic to my own perspective, see
A History of Ideas Concerning the Morality of Suicide, Assisted Suicide and Voluntary Euthanasia
Physician Assisted Euthanasia, 2005
The article examines from an historical perspective some of the key ideas used in contemporary bioethics debates both for and against the practices of assisted suicide and euthanasia. Key thinkers examined--spanning the Ancient, Medieval and Modern periods--include Plato, Aristotle, Augustine, Aquinas, Hume, Kant, and Mill. The article concludes with a synthesizing summary of key ideas that oppose or defend assisted suicide and euthanasia.”
An Ethical Excursion of Euthanasia
isara solutions, 2020
Should an individual, in addition to the right to live, have a right to die? The debate of euthanasia has been a globally controversial and overheated issue for many decades. The word 'euthanasia' is derived from Greek 'euthanos' meaning 'a gentle and easy death'. However, it is now used to refer to the killing of patients who are incurably ill and in great pain and distress, in order to relieve them of their sufferings. Euthanasia can be of three types: voluntary euthanasia or assisted suicide or mercy killing (euthanasia performed with patient's consent), non-voluntary euthanasia (when the patient is unable to give consent) and involuntary euthanasia (which is performed on a patient against his will). Euthanasia can be carried out either by administering a lethal dose of a suitable drug (active euthanasia) or letting the patient die by withholding treatment (passive euthanasia). While passive euthanasia is considered legal in many countries (India, Australia, Germany, England, etc) active euthanasia is only legal in Netherlands and Belgium. The person seeking euthanasia often argues that in a civilized society giving everybody the right to a 'dignified death' without pain is ethically acceptable as a universal principle. However, there are many social, political and moral dilemmas legalizing euthanasia. In this dissertation few of them is highlighted.
The End of Life: Euthanasia and Morality
Journal of Medical Ethics, 1987
James Rachels argues against the traditional view that the killing of the innocent is always wrong and presents an alternative view based on a fecund distinction between having a life and merely being alive, between a biographical life and a biological life. In an essay which makes a signal contribution to the euthanasia debate, he examines the ideas and assumptions that lie behind one of the most important moral rules, the rule against killing. Where killing is concerned, the dominant moral tradition of our culture is, Rachels holds, profoundly mistaken at almost every point. His essay presents a systematic argument against the traditional view and a defense of an alternative account. Rachels acknowledges that the traditional theory, from a philosophical point of view, is the only fully worked-out, systematically elaborated theory of the subject we have. Its development has been one of the great intellectual achievements of Western culture, accompliced by thinkers of great ingenuity and high moral purpose, and a complex account of the morality of killing has thus resulted. This account appeals to a series of distinctions that, taken together, define a class of actions said to be absolutely forbidden. In deciding whether a particular killing is permissible, the method is to aprly the distinctions to determine whether the act falls into the forbidden class. Some of these distinctions have to do with the status of the victim; for example, is the victim human or non-human, for at the heart of the traditional dotrine is the idea that the protection of human life-all human life-is immensely important. Likewise, it matters enormously, whether the human in question is innocent or not. Capital punishment
Suicide, Euthanasia and Human Dignity
Acta Analytica, 2001
Kant has famously argued that human beings or persons, in virtue of their capacity for rational and autonomous choice and agency, possess dignity, which is an intrinsic, final, unconditional, inviolable, incomparable and irreplaceable value. This value, wherever found, commands respect and imposes rather strict moral constraints on our deliberations, intentions and actions. This paper deals with the question of whether, as some Kantians have recently argued, certain types of (physician-assisted) suicide and active euthanasia, most notably the intentional destruction of the life of a terminally-ill, but rational and autonomous patient in order to prevent certain serious harms, such as enduring or reccuring pain or the loss of the meaning in life, from befalling him really are inconsistent with respect for the patient's human dignity. I focus on two independent, though interrelated explications of the rather vague initial idea that the patient (as well as the doctor), in intending and bringing about his death, treats his person or rational nature merely as a means and so denigrates his dignity: (i) that in doing what he is doing, he does not act for the sake of his person, but for the sake of something else; (ii) that, by trading his person for pain relief, he engages himself in an irrational and hence immoral exchange. After critically discussing some suggestions about how to understand this charge, I eventually find Kantian objections to suicide and (active) euthanasia, based on the idea of human dignity, less than compelling. For all the paper proves, suicide and (active) euthanasia may still be morally impermissible, but then this must be so for some other reason than the one given above.
2024
This paper thoroughly investigates the complexities surrounding state-sanctioned assisted suicide, arguing that such practices are in direct violation of divine law while simultaneously imposing a potentially harmful expectation on vulnerable groups, including the ill, disabled, and elderly. By delving into theological interpretations, ethical dilemmas, and existing legal frameworks, this paper asserts that assisted suicide undermines the sanctity of life and may foster a societal pressure for these populations to contemplate death as a solution to their suffering.
EUTHANASIA: Legal, Religious, and Medical Ethics Perspectives
Mohamed Khalifa, 2023
While technological and scientific advancement has led to rapid development in the medical sector and the pharmaceutical industry and thereby resulted in the treatment of major illnesses, some diseases still are untreatable and impinge on a good quality of life. This prejudice against pain and suffering has led some doctors and scientists to suggest euthanasia, also known as artificial death, to end the pain associated with some untreatable illnesses. It is a suggestion that is based on the ground that death is preferable to life. As more countries in the West have moved toward the discussion of implementing this recent practice, discussions regarding the ethics of the nature of the medical profession and its ethical and legal obligation towards treating patients and alleviating their pain and what that means came into question. Consequently, the law stepped in to intervene as the judge on whether to authorize or criminalize this emerging medical practice. This paper is set to: first, provide a brief historical overview of the context in which euthanasia as a medical practice came to emergence; second, clarify the meaning of the practice through an analysis of the medical perspective, with a particular focus on the ethical argument put forward by practitioners; third, engage in a discussion of religious views as well as legislative laws on euthanasia; fourth, analyze the contested claim that modernity gave birth to this phenomena. This paper encompasses two aspects: it engages legal texts concerning the development of the laws regarding euthanasia and then moves to a discussion of religious views and their influence on shaping the law of euthanasia, with a particular focus on Islamic sharia law and its objectives.
EUTHANASIA: AN ACT OF PERFORMANCE UNDER THE PURVIEW OF ETHICAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS
International Journal of Applied Research (IJAR),, 2021
There has been much debate in recent years all over the world over issues concerning the end of life, such as 'Suicide' and 'Euthanasia'-the assisted suicide. Euthanasia became a matter of general debate in the late nineteenth century for the rst time. The Public became conscious and felt the necessity to achieve a good death by allowing the terminally ill patient to die with less pain. The preoccupation of medicine in the 1950s to 1970s was to extend life at all costs (Van Delden 1988). However, both the concepts of patient's rights and liberty have widely highlighted the terminally ill person's right to decide the time and the way by which the person should die (Heintz,1994). The word 'Euthanasia' which is Greek in origin appears during Hallenistic period. "Greek word-'eu' means "goodly or well
Educational Research Journals, 2010
Human life is sacred. The heartless and heinous destruction of human life in the name of euthanasia and assisted suicide is a great threat to the sanctity of human life which great books of religions enjoin. This paper seeks to examine from the Christian point of view, practice of euthanasia and assisted suicide which has become a great challenge to the sanctity of human life. It recommends among others that euthanasia and assisted suicide should be stopped because human life is valuable irrespective of how debilitated, deformed or degraded in human sight such life might look at a particular time. Keyword: Euthanasia, Assisted Suicide, Sanctity, Human Life
Physician-Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia: Theological and Ethical Responses
Christian bioethics: Non-Ecumenical Studies in Medical Morality
Euthanasia and rational suicide were acceptable practices in some quarters in antiquity. These practices all but disappeared as Hippocratic, Jewish, Christian, and Muslim beliefs took hold in Europe and the Near East. By the late nineteenth century, however, a political movement to legalize euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (PAS) began in Europe and the United States. Initially, the path to legalization was filled with obstacles, especially in the United States. In the last few decades, however, several Western nations have legalized euthanasia, and several US jurisdictions have now legalized PAS, giving state sanction to these once forbidden practices. With increasing social and political pressure to accept PAS, Christians need to understand how to think about this issue from an explicitly Christian perspective. Independent of the question of legalization, there are significant theological and ethical questions. This special issue aims to address those concerns, including: ...