Death and Dying Case Study: A Christian Perspective on Euthanasia

This case study analyzes the ethical issues surrounding death and dying, specifically focusing on a man named George who is facing a terminal illness. The paper explores how George might interpret his suffering through a Christian worldview, considering values, beliefs, and decision-making in the context of his illness. The discussion examines the Christian perspective on suffering, the hope of resurrection, and the value of human life. The study also delves into the ethical considerations of euthanasia, contrasting Christian views with utilitarian and Kantian ethical theories. The conclusion summarizes the different perspectives on how individuals should respond to suffering and death. The assignment provides a detailed analysis of the case study, offering valuable insights into the intersection of faith, ethics, and end-of-life decisions.

Running head: DEATH AND DYING CASE STUDY
DEATH AND DYING CASE STUDY
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author note:

1
DEATH AND DYING CASE STUDY
Introduction:
In the past few eras, health care professionals have struggled to balance the care process
by shifting it towards more spiritual roots, identifying that spirituality is highly correlated with
the health and wellbeing of the individuals. Diverse religions incorporated the explanation of
why people become ill. Moreover, religions have developed various perspective regarding the
ways people should respond to suffering (Schaffer, Sandau & Missal, 2017). At this juncture,
one of the most fundamental concerns addressed by diverse religions is how patients suffering
from terminal illnesses should respond to the problem. Hence, this paper aims to provide a
critical analysis of the ethical issue raised for a man named George, a man who is developing a
terminal illness that will result in a lot of suffering and death. This paper will provide how
George will interpret his suffering in the Christian world view, values and beliefs as a person and
decision making according to the Christian world view in the following paragraphs.
Discussion:
Interpretation of suffering from Christian narratives:
Death takes on a specific sense when it is viewed from the perspective of Christian
narratives. It is, in fact, not the greatest evil that could befall a human being and is furthermore
transformed in the light of the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Rieg, Newbanks & Sprunger, 2018).
Human being are living in a fallen world where aches, pain and illness are constant reminders of
fallenness of the world. Considering the Christian narratives from the perspective of fallenness of
the world, death is considered a will of the god where suffering is considered as the trial taken by
the god to provide a pathway to go the heaven (Chang, 2016). Taking a deep insight into the
situation, George is suffering from a terminal illness, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis which

2
DEATH AND DYING CASE STUDY
impacted his quality of life by impairing his daily activity. At this juncture, by considering the
voluntary euthanasia as an option, he is considering his suffering as a loss of hope of living a
purposeful life (Stephens, 2016). In this context, he is taking action against the will of the god
that can hinder him from going to heaven.
Interpretation of suffering from Christian narratives from the focus of hope of
resurrection:
While discussing the suffering from the perspective of the Christian world view,
especially from the point of view of hope of resurrection, it is crucial to discuss Jesus’s
Resurrection. Jesus’s Resurrection indicated god’s goodness as the creator and the sense of
justice of the god as redeemer. Jesus’s Resurrection is considered as God’s plan for us is not an
escaped from our bodies into some heavenly realm that presents above the cloud. This also
signifies the diving commitment to justice (Mugg & Turner , 2017). At this juncture,
Resurrection of Jesus becomes the Christian basis of hope since against all hardships, god
defeated the death and demonstrated the immense power of the god (Doran, 2017). Hence, the
hope of resurrection allows individuals to live a life which is characterized by the hope offered
by the god since hope offer judgment on the present situation from the point of view of god. The
hope one fined through the resurrection of Jesus since it is the source of novel possibilities that
encourage the individuals to transform the possibilities into reality. Hope inspires mankind to
criticize injustice way of living and suggests the novel solution for living a life in a way through
actions that serve the wills of the god (Mugg & Turner , 2017). Considering the case study of
George, he is suffering a terminal illness that impacted his daily activity and quality of life. At
this juncture, terminating his suffering is against the will of the god as it will hinder him from
involving in the actions that will serve justice. At this juncture, in the light of the Christian

3
DEATH AND DYING CASE STUDY
narratives, there is no hope of resurrection since he is terminated his suffering through
euthanasia.
Value of George as a person:
As discussed by Harris and Yancey (2017), the value of human life is intrinsic as it
derived from the god and made human being as their own image. Similar to life, physical death
is inevitable and it is frequently accompanied by the sufferings, illness and physical pain.
Considering the Christian world view, the value of the life of a person is solely determined by
the actions that have been taken by the person and the extent to which a person is able to perform
the actions even within the sufferings. In this context, suffering enables individuals to develop a
hope in Christ who has conquered death and sympathize human suffering. However, a contrast to
the suffering, ending someone’s life for relieving suffering or inconvenience is not only
unforgivable but also breach clearly defined moral order of God. At this juncture, Christian
world view will inform him that by considering euthanasia as an option can end his suffering but
reduce the value of his life a person and quality of life. Hence, in order to serve the order to God,
he must not reduce the quality of life and value of him as a person.
Values and consideration:
In order to discuss values and consideration regarding euthanasia, it is noteworthy to
discuss the Christian world view. Considering Christian world view voluntarily assisted
euthanasia should not have opted as Christians are mostly against the voluntary assisted
euthanasia. According to the Christian world view, while suffering is not good but a result of
living in the fallen world, it serves the releasing purposes in the life of the individuals who is
experiencing sufferings (Rieg, Newbanks & Sprunger, 2018). At this juncture, as discussed
above ending someone’s life for relieving suffering or inconvenience is not only unforgivable

4
DEATH AND DYING CASE STUDY
but also breach clearly defined moral order of God as it interferes with the natural process of
death (Snyder, 2019). Hence, by pursuing the euthanasia as an option, George will involve in the
act of sin that will reduce his value as life and he should consider the suffering as a way of
serving the order of God.
The moral principle according to the Christian world view:
In Christianity, intentional killing is considered as the act of sin as it interferes with the
natural process of death. At this juncture, Utilitarianism can be applied to discuss the moral
justice of euthanasia. Ethical theory Utilitarianism that governs justified actions from unjustified
actions by concentrating on outcomes. According to Utilitarianism, one choice can be
considered as the most ethical choice if the choice will produce the greatest good for the greatest
number in mankind (Piacquadio, 2017). In contrast to this theory, Kantianism is a deontological
moral theory that suggested that rightness or wrongness of actions that does not depend on the
outcome of the action rather than actions one is involved to fulfil the predetermined duties
(Crowell,2017). At this juncture, considering the Christian world view, euthanasia can be
considered as the morally unjustified since the outcome will not provide the greatest good rather
it will interfere with the god’s will. Hence, it is morally unjustified to opt for the euthanasia.
Appropriate decision:
If I was George, I would have chosen euthanasia since it will fulfil the personal goal of
health from the perspective of health care. As discussed above Kantianism is a deontological
moral theory that suggested that rightness or wrongness of actions that does not depend on the
outcome of the action rather than actions one is involved to fulfil the predetermined duties.
Considering Kantianism, from the perspective of health care professionals, a personal goal of
individuals is to live a purposeful life by fulfilling the duty (Daskal, 2018). However, since

5
DEATH AND DYING CASE STUDY
terminal illness can increase the sufferings by impairing the ability to involve in the daily
activities, it also reduces the ability to fulfil the duty. At this juncture, euthanasia will end the
sufferings and provide a comfortable dying supported by Kantianism theory. Hence, euthanasia
will be the most suitable choice.
Conclusion:
On a concluding note, it can be said that the religions have developed various
perspective regarding the ways people should respond to suffering and death. The case study
focused on a man who is suffering from terminally ill disease and inquired regarding the
euthanasia. Considering Christian worldview, death is considered a will of the god where
suffering is considered as the trial taken by the god to provide a pathway to go the heaven. By
choosing euthanasia he will hinder the process of going to heaven and trails taken by God. There
is no hope of resurrection since he is terminated his suffering through euthanasia. It will also
reduce his quality of life and value as a person since George will involve in the act of sin by
interfering the natural process of death. Considering the Christian view, euthanasia is morally
injustice as according to Utilitarianism, the action will not produce greater good for the greatest
number. However, considering the personal decision, euthanasia will be a suitable decision that
will fulfil the personal goal and reduce sufferings.

6
DEATH AND DYING CASE STUDY
References:
Chang, S. S. (2016). In Search of a Biblical Worldview: Exploring Paul’s Gospel Worldview in
His Letter to the Romans. Journal of Christian Education & Information Technology, 30,
51-74.
Crowell, S. G. (2017). Neo‐Kantianism. A Companion to Continental Philosophy, 185-197.
Daskal, S. (2018). Support for Voluntary Euthanasia with No Logical Slippery Slope to Non-
Voluntary Euthanasia. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 28(1), 23-48.
Doran, C. (2017). Creation Care this Side of the Resurrection. The Greening of Religion, 57.
Harris, H. W., & Yancey, G. (2017). Values, dissonance, and rainbows: Practice tips for
Christian social workers in a polarized world. Social Work and Christianity, 44(1/2), 123.
Mugg, J., & Turner Jr, J. T. (2017). Why a bodily resurrection?: The bodily resurrection and the
mind/body relation. Journal of Analytic Theology, 5(1), 121-144.
Piacquadio, P. G. (2017). A fairness justification of utilitarianism. Econometrica, 85(4), 1261-
1276.
Rieg, L. S., Newbanks, R. S., & Sprunger, R. (2018). Caring from a Christian Worldview:
Exploring Nurses' Source of Caring, Faith Practices, and View of Nursing. Journal of
Christian Nursing, 35(3), 168-173.
Rieg, L. S., Newbanks, R. S., & Sprunger, R. (2018). Caring from a Christian Worldview:
Exploring Nurses' Source of Caring, Faith Practices, and View of Nursing. Journal of
Christian Nursing, 35(3), 168-173.

7
DEATH AND DYING CASE STUDY
Schaffer, M. A., Sandau, K., & Missal, B. (2017). Demystifying nursing theory: A Christian
nursing perspective. Journal of Christian Nursing, 34(2), 102-107.
Snyder, B. F. (2019). Christian Environmental Ethics and Economic Stasis. Worldviews: Global
Religions, Culture, and Ecology, 23(2), 154-170.
Stephens, M. (2016). The fall and Christian education. Christian Teachers Journal, 24(1), 4.