euthanasia !!!!

The sanctity of life- and eval

• traditional Christian view. Sometimes now called the ‘strong’ sanctity of life.

• created in God’s image

• wrong to kill people - The 10 commandments say thou shalt not murder - 1 Corinthians says that our body is a ‘temple of the holy spirit’

  evaluations

• weak sanctity of life view

• many themes found in the Bible- compassion and love

• All these factors must be taken into account and in some extreme cases the sanctity of life may be outweighed by the others

The Quality of life - and eval

• the balance of happiness over suffering.

• Singer says that the sanctity of life is based on outdated Christian views and thus should be re-evaluated

• 'In Rethinking Life and Death' (1994), Singer sets out five quality of life commandments to replace those of the traditional sanctity of life position

• Singer argues that the reason killing is wrong is that it violates the preferences or interests of a being

• low quality of life and a preference to die, then voluntary euthanasia is justified.

• Non-voluntary euthanasia is also justified - vegetative state and sick babies

• reasons killing is normally wrong do not apply in cases like this where quality of life is low or non-existent

• personhood- rationality and conciousness

counter

• Archbishop Fisher criticises the quality of life view with the slippery slope argument

• Fisher further argues that this creates pressure to be euthanised on marginalised people who feel like a burden

• 2022 there was controversy when some people requested euthanasia due to being in poverty

EVAL

• Fisher’s arguments are unsuccessful- should be careful about how we implement it

• singer influenced by mill after enlightenment as we are man come of age

Autonomy- eval

• Nozick took a deontological/absolutist view

• ‘self-ownership’, that each person owns their body and can do what they want with it.

• If someone wants euthanasia then that is up to them, no matter the reason.

• If someone else wants to help them, there is nothing ethically wrong with that.

• Voluntary euthanasia is therefore always morally acceptable.

evaluation

• ethical downsides to allowing anyone to die who wants to.

• Singer points to the example of a love-sick teenager who wants to die for short-sighted reasons

• ‘safely predict’ they will get over their issues

• absolutely any reason would lead to many people dying

• Mill and Singer take a consequentialist view of autonomy to solve this issue

• society will be the happiest it can be if we follow the harm principle.

• People should be free to do what they want, so long as they aren’t harming others

• maximise happiness

• slippery slope towards absolutist autonomy

• once you accept that people have the right to die, you have no way to prevent slipping

• voluntary euthanasia is good when it is rationally chosen

Situation ethics application to Euthanasia

• Situation ethics would judge that euthanasia can be morally good, in situation where it maximises agape.

• if someone has a very low quality of life and an autonomous wish to die, it seems that Fletcher would accept euthanasia

• pressured into euthanasia

• Fletcher would think it wrong to allow euthanasia in such cases.

evaluation

• Barclay’s critique

• People’s loving nature can be corrupted by power. 

• Someone might find it loving to manipulate/pressure someone into or out of euthanasia

• Fletcher and Robinson argue (influenced by Bonhoeffer) that humanity has ‘come of age’, however. This means that humanity has become more mature

• they needed fixed ridged clear rules to follow- However, now people are more civilised

• Barclay disagrees however, and thinks that although people might appear improved

• classic argument that power corrupts- stanford prison and lord of flies

Natural law application to euthanasia

• should follow the Bible teachings

• Euthanasia violates the primary precept to protect and preserve human life. 

• Violating the sanctity of life, such as by allowing euthanasia, also violates the primary precept of maintaining an orderly society

• Our society will break down because living contrary to God’s design

• Mother Theresa- the greatest threat to world peace is abortion

• Catholic Church uses the double effect to claim that sometimes doctors can stop or withdraw treatment (passive euthanasia)- administer pain medication which could speed up death- intention is not to kill

evaluation

• Whether Natural law ethics and the sanctity of life is outdated

• socio-economic conditions of their time

• were not educated nor civilised enough

• primary precepts are no longer useful

• Natural law is no longer relevant

Jonathan Glover

• suggested several checks on whether someone should be assisted to die.

• Jonathan Glover suggests that the distinction between acts and omissions may not be so clear cut

• This implies some external judgement as to the patient’s quality of life as well as their mental state. If they are making the decision in a diminished mental state then they are not truly autonomous.

• Glover suggests that there are at least five options with regard to euthanasia:

  1. Take all possible steps to preserve life

  2. Take all ordinary steps to preserve life but not use extraordinary means

  3. Not killing but taking no steps to preserve life

  4. An act which, while not intending to kill, has death as a possible foreseen consequence

  5. The deliberate act of killing

  However, we may debate what is or is not ‘extraordinary means’

DDE CATHOLIC CHURCH

• no intention to kill

• pain killers, removing life saving treatment

• no extraordinary means

case studies

• Alfie Evans. A particularly difficult case because the (apparently religious) parents wanted medical treatment to continue but the High Court of the UK ruled that the decision should be taken away from them as continued treatment of Alfie would be unkind and inhumane

• Hillsborough stadium tragedy, Tony was left in a persistent vegetative state - and hence was not legally dead. His parents believed he would not want to be kept alive in such a condition

• women who got euthnasia without telling family

• 1 in 20 candian deaths are euthanasia

• assisted dying speedy in canada

• bill passed in uk but for some diseases

• hippocratic oath

James Rachel

• Suppose Smith will inherit a fortune if his young nephew dies. One evening he drowns his nephew in the bath and arranges the scene to look like an accident. The nephew’s death is an ‘act’ of Smith.

• Suppose Jones will also inherit a fortune if his young nephew died. As he enters the bathroom, he sees his nephew slip and hit his head and slowly drown. He watches and does nothing to save the nephew. The nephew’s death is an ‘omission’; Jones could have saved him.

The traditional idea of acts and omissions says that Smith is guiltier than Jones but both seem bad