Moral and Ethical Considerations of Euthanasia (Deakin ASP129)

This essay provides a comprehensive discussion on the morality of euthanasia, exploring whether it is morally correct or incorrect. The introduction defines euthanasia, differentiating between active, passive, voluntary, involuntary, and non-voluntary forms, and highlights the ethical and legal complexities surrounding the practice. The essay then delves into ethical frameworks, including deontological theory, Kant's principles, and virtue ethics, to analyze the moral permissibility of euthanasia. The discussion encompasses religious perspectives and legal issues, presenting arguments for and against euthanasia, and examining its implications in different countries. The conclusion summarizes the positive and negative aspects of euthanasia, emphasizing that it should be considered only when all other medical options have been exhausted and based on the patient's explicit request. The essay underscores the need for medical advancements while addressing the ethical dilemmas associated with euthanasia, with references to relevant literature and legal frameworks.

Reading Head: Euthanasia 0
Euthanasia
January 17
2020
In this abstract a discussion will be present on why euthanasia is
morally correct or incorrect because it is a matter of life.

EUTHANASIA 1
Contents
Introduction................................................................................................................................2
Euthanasia..................................................................................................................................2
Ethical Framework.....................................................................................................................3
Euthanasia moral or Immoral ?..................................................................................................4
Conclusion..................................................................................................................................5
References..................................................................................................................................7

EUTHANASIA 2
Introduction
“Euthanasia” is the practice of intentionally ending a life to relieve pain and suffering.
Euthanasia is the deliberate practice of a person’s death for the benefit of that person. In most
of the cases Euthanasia is done with the consent of a person. In this phenomenon if a patient
is suffering from incurable disease they can themselves request doctor to end their life. This
practice is morally permissible in minds of only some people because if a terminal ill patient
faces painful death it is much kinder to spare them from suffering. But some people argue
that this process is not morally correct as just because of patients’ indecisiveness consent to
end someone’s life is not a moral act. From religious point of view as well this act is
considered to be immoral (Paterson, 2017).In this discussion a light is thrown on moral and
immoral behaviour of “Euthanasia”.
Euthanasia
As discussed above “Euthanasia” i.e. the process which is considered to be a painless killing
of person’s suffering. This act can be implemented only in those circumstances when a
person is suffering from a disease which is either incurable or suffering from irreversible
coma (Annadurai, Danasekaran, & Mani, 2014). There are many advance medical
technologies which are being used in treatment of patients. But then also if condition of
patient is very critical and they are terminally ill in those cases this process can be used for
painlessly ending life of a person.
Further, acts of Euthanasia are further classified into three categories i.e. “voluntary”,
“involuntary” and “non- voluntary”. Voluntary euthanasia is the process which is performed
only with the consent of a person. Involuntary euthanasia is the process which is performed
without the request of a person. Non-voluntary is the process which is performed when

EUTHANASIA 3
person is incapable of giving consent. Furthermore Euthanasia is also categorised in two
categories i.e. active and passive euthanasia. Active euthanasia is considered to be a
deliberate act which is usually done through lethal drugs. Passive euthanasia is morally
permissible act as many people thinks death of a person is the will of God.
Although euthanasia is not legal in many countries but assisted suicide is considered to be
legal in many countries. Euthanasia is attached with morality terms and conditions. Further,
to perform euthanasia a person should request lethal two times in the form of verbal and
written communication. But the main condition which is attached with this process is the
consent or request of patient. And doctor before performing this action should also ensure
that patient is mentally competent to make this decision on their own ( Keown, 2018, p. 1).
Ethical Framework
Ethical deliberations should be taken into account before performing this act. As there are
some standards and care in ethical reasoning that is related to the care of a person. According
to ethics this act should only performed in those conditions in which involve serious illness,
diseases or disabilities are involved. There are times when conflicts may be arise because
people may think that ethical considerations are overlooked. Therefore, before performing
this act proper justifications should be given by doctors (Lombard, 2018).
There are certain theories which can justify this ethical framework. And these are discussed
below.
“Deontological theory says that the rightness of actions is determined not solely by their
consequences but partly or entirely by their intrinsic nature.” According to this theory actions
should be based on right or wrong rather than on the consequences. This theory suggests that
actions should be right based not duty based.

EUTHANASIA 4
As humans everyone has their own rights and if a patient chooses to end their life because of
their incurable disease pain and suffering they have all the rights to take that decision for
themselves. This theory is not affecting in negative way because to relieve patient from pain
and suffering is considered as justified action. ( Taennsjoe, 2013).
Principle of Kant also suggests that a person has all rights to take decisions for them. Kant
personally believes that euthanasia should be impermissible but according to his morality
principle it is permissible when consent of patient is involved in it. If actions are taken with
the right intentions it will not affect negatively and it will give relief to majority of patients.
And this is the reason it supports Euthanasia (Nathan, 2015).
Virtue Ethics this theory is not based on actions. This theory is concerned about becoming a
good person rather than acting like good person. Virtue ethics is about achieving humanely
rather than constantly performing duties. According to this theory the actions which are
performed by person shows inner morality of the person. Therefore, this theory can be used
to observe patients’ suffering and pain and act accordingly on them (Jordan, 2017).
All these theories suggested that euthanasia is not morally incorrect because every person has
right to take decisions for them. According to moral ethics also person should be performing
those actions which are right or wrong according to the situation without worrying about the
consequences. Euthanasia is debatable topic as it has its pros and cons. It may be morally
correct according to these theories but from the other point of view it is wrong.
Euthanasia moral or Immoral ?
Moral and Immoral values are important to justify any act as it will give difference between
right and wrong. Euthanasia is the concept which is attached with dual concept of right and

EUTHANASIA 5
wrong. On one hand it is considered to be moral because sparing person from pain and relief
can be termed as morally correct but on the other hand ending person’s life is considered to
be an immoral act (Savulescu, 2016). Further, if religious point of view is also taken in
consideration then also it is not considered to be morally justified. Religious beliefs suggest
that death is the will of God and no one has that right to end anyone’s life. There are also
many legal issues attached with it which suggests that it is an immoral act. But in many
countries it is considered to be legal because they are looking at the positive side of this
action and in those countries if person themselves is requesting for this procedure it is
considered justifiable (BBC, 2014).
Euthanasia is considered to be the most controversial medical-legal subject of all time. This
subject is always of a topic of research because it is moral as well as immoral thing to do. In
medical institutes it is always been discussed because of its nature. Moral, legal, ethical,
personal stories are always been discussed to justify is it moral or immoral. But till now it is
justify that euthanasia and assisted suicide are two different topic and law is also different for
both of them ( Jones, Gastmans, & Mackellar, 2017).
In five United States euthanasia is legalised because people are demanding it to be legalised
in large numbers because they want patient to get rid from pain and suffering. And after it is
legalised there is increase in frequency of death of patients. This procedure is implemented
on most of the patients who are suffering from cancer (Emanuel, Philipsen, & Urwin, 2016).
The debate about this euthanasia is almost in every country and some countries have already
legalised it but then also it is used in rare conditions. According to the data of 2014, in
Netherlands 3.8% deaths are caused by euthanasia, in Belgium 4.6% deaths are caused by
euthanasia, in Oregon only 0.3% deaths are caused by euthanasia and most of these patients
are suffering from cancer (Emanuel E. , 2017).

EUTHANASIA 6
Voluntary Euthanasia is legal in country like Netherlands because people think that doctor
should have right to act on the demand of the patient. Patients’ have all the rights to die
peacefully if they are suffering from incurable pain and suffering (Singer, 2003).
Conclusion
Euthanasia has two sides i.e. positive and negative. Positive side reflects that it can relief
patient from pain and suffering who is in vulnerable condition but the Negative side reflects
that it not correct from religious point of view because killing someone is considered to be
sin. But it is already legal in many countries as they are concentrating on its positive side.
There are certain cases in which doctors have not taken proper measures to cure patient and
perform euthanasia and in this case they are found guilty. Euthanasia should be the last step
when all advanced technology and medical care is given to the patient then also their
condition is not improving or there are not any chances of improving their condition and they
are in vulnerable pain and only on patient’s request this action can be taken. But doctors
should concentrate less on this topic rather they should concentrate on improving medical
science and technology.

EUTHANASIA 7
References
Jones, D. A., Gastmans, C., & Mackellar, C. (2017). Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide:
Lessons from Belgium. Medical Law Review, 27(1), 180–187.
Keown, J. (2018). Euthanasia, Ethics and Public Policy: An Argument against Legalisation.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Taennsjoe, T. (2013). Understanding Ethics. Edinburgh University Press.
Annadurai, K., Danasekaran, R., & Mani, G. (2014). ‘Euthanasia: Right to Die with Dignity’.
Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care, 3(4), 477-478.
BBC. (2014). Ethical problems of euthanasia. Retrieved 01 17, 2020, from Ethics Guide:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/euthanasia/overview/problems.shtml
Emanuel, E. (2017). Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide: focus on the data. The
Medical Journal of Australia, 1-2.
Emanuel, E. J., Philipsen, B. O., & Urwin, J. W. (2016). Attitudes and Practices of
Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide in the United States, Canada, and Europe.
JAMA, 316(1), 79-90.
Jordan, M. (2017). The Ethical Considerations of Physician-assisted Suicide. Physician-
assisted Suicide, 5-6.
Lombard, J. (2018). Law, Palliative Care and Dying: Legal and Ethical Challenges. London
and New York: Routledge.
Nathan, R. (2015). Is Euthanasia Morally Permissible? Why or Why. Sound Decisions:An
Undergraduate Bioethics Journal, 1(1).

EUTHANASIA 8
Nuland, S. (1997). Accidents, suicide, and euthanasia. Accidents, Suicide and Euthanasia,
151--157.
Paterson, C. (2017). Assisted Suicide and Euthansia. London and New York: Routledge.
Savulescu, J. (2016). Concise argument—wellbeing, collective responsibility and ethical
capitalism. Journal of Medical Ethics, 331-333.
Singer, P. (2003). Justifying Voluntary Euthanasia. Euthanasia and Sustaining Life, 212-217.