Ethical Issues in Euthanasia

Ethical Issues in Euthanasia

Voluntary Euthanasia is done with the patient’s consent. On the other hand, where the patient cannot make a decision or has not left a valid will, forced Euthanasia may be carried out. When a third party intentionally kills a patient, this is known as active Euthanasia. On the other hand, passive Euthanasia happens when medical staff ignores or stops doing anything that would have kept a patient alive but fails to keep them alive.

Get Your Custom Essay Written From Scratch
Are You Overwhelmed With Writing Assignments?
Give yourself a break and turn to our top writers. They’ll follow all the requirements to compose a premium-quality piece for you.
Order Now

There are many arguments and criticisms against Euthanasia. The protagonists contend that people have the freedom to choose between life and death, while the opponents counter that doing so violates their basic, unalienable right to life. This essay makes the case that Euthanasia should be considered not only a medical practice carried out following healthcare ethics but also a person’s inalienable right to die. It also discusses the ethical issues in Euthanasia.

Euthanasia as serving the right of the patient

Modern society must accept Euthanasia as a practice that respects the fundamental right of every person to choose life or death hence ethical issues in Euthanasia. Although euthanasia is illegal in the US and most other countries, it’s noteworthy that Washington and other states like Vermont, New Mexico, Oregon, and Montana have legalized self-assisted death.

Although forced Euthanasia raises moral questions, voluntary Euthanasia is the best and most compassionate option for people with no other options for maintaining a healthy quality of life. Therefore, voluntary Euthanasia should be permitted in all US states because it eliminates suffering. Voluntary Euthanasia supports ethical issues in Euthanasia.

The right to die is a basic human right that must be honored by all parties involved, including the government. It proves ethical issues in Euthanasia. A person’s suffering can be alleviated humanely by performing a lethal injection if he or she has no other option. Accepting a person’s decision to die is critical since it’s the final resort after all other options have been exhausted. Therefore, it may be stated that the individual’s freedom of choice includes the right to die in circumstances when there are no medical remedies.

Voluntary Euthanasia, as one of the ethical issues in Euthanasia, is fraught with moral ambiguity since it puts the patient, who is meant to be safeguarded from excessive pain. The patient is also at risk of further injury, even though clear ethical norms exist to guarantee that medical workers do not injure the patient.

Euthanasia is an option when it is in the patient’s best interest. The patient will suffer more physically and psychologically if the doctor chooses to do nothing, even though there is an option to act in the patient’s best interest (ANA Center for Ethics and Human Rights, 2013). Euthanasia would be the most ethical course of action for a doctor facing the issue above to relieve a patient of unbearable suffering.

Many contemporary arguments against assisted suicide are motivated by hatred, utopian reasoning, and the rights of those seeking it. Since the existing rules are quite efficient in preventing its abuse, there should be no polarization on the ethics of Euthanasia. Autonomy, consciousness, and expression are all part of what we mean when we say someone is a person.

There is no justification for murder, according to deontologists. When the particular legal ramifications are considered, the opposing sides’ arguments become moot. The practical school of thinking believes that each person has sole responsibility for their own life and death. As a result, individuals who oppose euthanasia present ethical objections that disregard the legal and ethical rights of persons who need Euthanasia, thus ethical issues in Euthanasia.

The Ethics of Euthanasia

The issue of Euthanasia has sparked a lot of controversy and uncertainty in many people’s minds. The most controversial forms of Euthanasia are active voluntary Euthanasia, aided suicide, and physician-assisted suicide. In general, these words refer to the process of ending someone’s suffering by administering medications to that person’s body. There are a few nations and jurisdictions where Euthanasia is lawful under specific situations, hence ethical issues in Euthanasia. However, it is prohibited in all Australian states at this time, reflecting the status quo in most countries.

Some proponents of Euthanasia claim that people have the right to make their own decisions about death and that Euthanasia is meant to alleviate pain and suffering. Therefore it is referred to as “mercy killing.” It promotes ethical issues in Euthanasia. This method is incorrectly referred to as “passive euthanasia” by some who believe active Euthanasia is no worse than withholding or withdrawing medical care. It is said that such ideas are countered by opponents of Euthanasia, who argue that Euthanasia is murder and that it violates the individual’s right to autonomy and human rights. Furthermore, palliative care, rather than Euthanasia, should be the standard of care in modern medicine, according to several researchers.

The legal situation of active voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide

Assisted suicide, physician-assisted suicide, and active Euthanasia are all banned in Australia. Any intentional act resulting in another person’s death is considered murder in all Australian states and territories. Each Australian state’s criminal laws prohibit Euthanasia and assisted suicide, as well as the common law in New South Wales, South Australia, and Victoria.

For many years, Euthanasia and assisted suicide have been outlawed in Australia. However, the Northern Territory’s Rights of Terminally Ill Act allowed for Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide for a brief period (1995). The Northern Territory became the first place in the world to legalize active voluntary euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide when the Act was enacted in 1996, thus ethical issues in Euthanasia.

Terminally sick adults of legal age might request a physician’s assistance in dying under the terms of this law. The Euthanasia Laws Act 1997, passed by the federal government in 1997, ended this law’s short-lived existence. Because of legislation passed in 1997, no state may legally allow for the practice of Euthanasia or assisted suicide. Many Australian states have attempted to enact Euthanasia and assisted suicide in the previous decade, but all have failed. It is due to a majority opposition to this practice. However, they tried to enhance ethical issues in Euthanasia.

Arguments for and against Euthanasia

For

  1. Rights-based argument.

Euthanasia proponents contend that patients have the right to decide when and how they should die under the principles of autonomy and self-determination. A patient’s right to make decisions about their own lives, as long as it does not damage anybody else, is known as autonomy. They define autonomy as the right of a person to be in charge of his or her own body. It is to decide how and when he or she will die. People also claim that we have the right to self-determination and to die dignifiedly as part of our human rights. It promotes ethical issues in Euthanasia.

  1. Beneficence

Euthanasia is considered more beneficial than harmful when alleviating a patient’s agony and suffering. Compassion and mercy, according to proponents of Euthanasia, demand that no patient be permitted to suffer unnecessarily, and so mercy killing is acceptable.

Against

  1. The Sanctity of life.

The Sanctity of life is at the heart of the argument against Euthanasia, which can be both secular and religious in origin. Human life must be valued and safeguarded; this is the concept that guides all we do as a company regarding ethical issues in Euthanasia. Christians believe that human life is an offering to God, so the taking of that life should not bother God. A similar belief in the Islamic faith asserts that “it is God’s exclusive right to grant life and to inflict death.” Treatment can be withheld or withdrawn when it is deemed futile to facilitate the natural progression of dying.

  1. Euthanasia is murder.

Although the patient has given his or her agreement, society considers any action with the primary goal of causing the death of another to be intrinsically bad. Active voluntary Euthanasia is referred to by Callahan as “consenting adult killing” by the physician.

  1. Abuse of autonomy and human rights.

While proponents of Euthanasia utilize the concept of autonomy to support their case, it is also employed by those opposed to the practice. Autonomy is a principle that prevents the voluntary termination of the conditions essential for autonomy, such as death. Euthanasia requests by patients are also seldom considered autonomous, given most terminally ill patients may not be conscious or reasonable. It confirms ethical issues in Euthanasia.

According to Callahan, a person’s right to self-determination is conditioned by the benefit of their society, and hence they must evaluate the danger of harming their community. Some detractors of Euthanasia believe that Euthanasia violates the “right to life” in the context of human rights. According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, everyone has the right to life. Proponents of the right to live deny the existence of a right to die, arguing that suicide is always an acceptable option. These rights are part of ethical issues in Euthanasia.

  1. The role of palliative care.

Many people believe that Euthanasia is pointless because patients’ pain and suffering may be alleviated with sufficient palliative care. “Requests for euthanasia are rarely maintained when effective palliative care is established,” according to Norval and Gwyneth.

  1. The rights of vulnerable patients.

Euthanasia might lead to circumstances where patients’ rights are compromised if it becomes common practice. Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide can be coerced from patients who are getting expensive therapy, thus ethical issues in Euthanasia.

  1. The doctor-patient relationship and the physician’s role.

Active voluntary euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide as part of ethical issues in Euthanasia weaken the doctor-patient relationship, undermining the trust and confidence built within it. A physician must aid and preserve lives, not take them. Casting physicians as euthanasia administrators “would undermine and weaken the goals of the medical profession.”