Euthanasia

Euthanasia

• Until 196, suicide in the Uk was a criminal offence. The 1961 Suicide Act decriminalised suicide, but did not make it morally licit.
• Attitudes towards suicide date back to the first doctors of Ancient Greece. Hippocrates lived around the same time as Plato, who indicated that death was favourable to incurable disease, but Hippocrates is quoted to have stated the opposite: 'I will give no deadly medicine to anyone if asked, nor will I suggest such counsel.'
• Situationism would support the right to self determination if it was most the most loving action. Ethical theories such as Natural Law and Christian principles such as Sanctity of Life would be against Euthanasia because life is God given.

Situation Ethics and Euthanasia

• Situationists would argue that the "morality of an action depends on the situation"-Fletcher. Joseph Fletcher believed that there is an 'absolute principles of love' which would produce the best outcome.
• Fletcher created the four working principles to determine the right moral actions.
• The first of the four, Personalism, would argue that rules and principles should be set aside if love seems better served. We must put people before rules in our society. However, this is not helpful because we have laws and social values that need to be followed in order for society to function. In terms of religion, the 10 Commandments were given to Moses for us to follow; they were not suggestions.
• Relativism would suggest that rules and ethics can be flexible. Yes murder is wrong but we can change the rules relative to a situation like euthanasia. However, this is unhelpful because relativism can be rather vague. If rules change from situation to situation how will we know what is right and wrong. We need an ethical theory which gives straight forward answers.
• Pragmatism would argue that if euthanasia is the most practical action then its the action we must follow. This is the most logical out of the four working principles and can be used to establish the morality of euthanasia or murder if other actions would not make sense or be practical in the moment. For example, if someone is severely paralysed or has extreme mental health problems and they cannot survive without the constant aid of others, the most practical action in their opinion may be euthanasia. Having said that, there is the danger that pragmatism can allow for terrible things to happen such as adultery.
• The final principle is positivism. This principle focuses on a 'kind, patient, not self seeking' love which 'endures all things'. This principle would argue that euthanasia would be a loving thing to do if someone was in pain or constant depression because to allow them to endure this would not be a kind act. This principle is not helpful when discussing euthanasia because it starts with the belief that we should just accept that there are no fixed rules and ethics. Relying on love can be confusing and difficult for some people to accept.

Natural Law and Euthanasia

• It could be argued that Natural Law and other Christian traditions are the best methods when assessing whether euthanasia is morally acceptable. In natural law, the basic law states that we must ' do good and avoid evil'. This basic law leads us to the primary and secondary precepts, the first one being 'preservation of life'. Natural law would therefore argue that euthanasia is not morally acceptable because it does not follow the basic law or precepts.
• Therefore it could be argued that Natural Law is the best method of assessing whether euthanasia is morally acceptable because the rules are easy to follow. Following from 'preservation of life' we would have secondary precepts such as do not murder, do not commit suicide and so on. It is clear that euthanasia is morally unacceptable in natural law.

Christian Traditions and Euthanasia

• Christian traditions such as Sanctity of Life would also argue that euthanasia is morally unacceptable. The basic proposition of Sanctity of Life is that life is sacred and God given, therefore euthanasia is wrong because only God has the power to give and take life.
• Two complicated views of Sanctity of Life:
• Strong Sanctity...
• Strong sanctity of life is often referred to as the 'pro-life proposition' and philosophically responds to vitalism. Vitalists believe that human life is sacred because it possesses a 'God given soul'. There Strong Sanctity of life would argue that there are 'no ordinary or extraordinary means' to justify euthanasia.
• It could be argued that strong sanctity of life is the best method when assessing whether euthanasia is morally right because it is backed by biblical evidence. For example, Strong SOL would argue that life is always to be 'loved and protected' which is suggested in Jesus' parable of the Good Samaritan when a Samaritan overcomes prejudice to help a badly injured man. This type of biblical evidence shows that love is central to Christianity. You cannot justify murder because the act cannot possibly be loving.

Christian Traditions and Euthanasia

• Weak Sanctity of life:
• This Christian argument does not consider that killing an innocent person out of love is morally equivalent to murder; similar to relativism. Suicide and particularly euthanasia is different to murder because there is no ulterior motive such as revenge or cruelty. The weak SOL argues that life is a gift and not a burden. This gift is given so we may dispose of it as we wish. God gave as free will and ownership of his gift meaning that as 'good stewards' of this life (genesis 1:28) we can responsibly decide when to end it.
• Some Christians would argue that this is the best method when deciding whether euthanasia is morally acceptable because it uses logical reasoning, personal understanding and evidence from the Bible.
• Nevertheless, Fundamentalist Christians would argue that this is not the best method of deciding whether euthanasia is morally acceptable because weak SOL does not interpret the Bible literally. If the Bible is not interpreted literally, some Christians believe that this can cause the wrong message to be spread and can have dangerous consequences.

John Stuart Mill and Euthanasia

• Another way of assessing euthanasia is autonomy as the basis of quality of life principle. This argument values 'self rule' or autonomy.
• John Stuart Mill developed this principle in his book On Liberty(1859). Mill's 'form of liberalism' suggest that taking ones life is a matter of personal autonomy. A person should be free to determine their future with inference only if doing so caused harm to others.
• Mill had a very liberal view, providing maximum freedom. Although this liberal look on euthanasia provides personal freedom, it could in some circumstances set what is called a 'precedent' for the future and the law could have less control on society