|
|
This is only a preview of the paper
Click here to register and get the full text.
Existing members click here to login
|
|
|
The word ‘euthanasia’ derives from two Greek words, eu, meaning ‘good or easy’ and thanatos, meaning ‘death’. ... ’ In a more particular sense euthanasia means ‘mercy killing’ and by it is understood an ‘action or an omission which of itself or by intention causes death in order that suffering may be eliminated.’
The definition of euthanasia must be further clarified because dependent on it are philosophical, moral, legal, medical and ethical arguments for and against its practice. ... Through reviewing these arguments, seeing how euthanasia fits in with the criteria of palliative care, and attempting to foresee the various ramifications of permitting or forbidding euthanasia to be seen as part of this process, we will be enlightened as to whether euthanasia should be seen as part of the process of caring for the terminally ill.
To elaborate, ‘Voluntary euthanasia is mercy killing with the consent of the terminally ill person. Non-voluntary euthanasia is mercy killing without the consent of the person who is ill (although the consent of others such as parents or relatives can be obtained.)’ Involuntary euthanasia is the killing of a person who is able to give consent but is not asked, or does not wish to die. Moral philosophers also draw a distinction between active and passive euthanasia. Active euthanasia involves an ‘act’ designed to kill a patient. Passive euthanasia is refraining from medical treatment in order that the patient dies naturally. It is, as James Rachels puts it, ‘the difference between killing people, on the one hand, and merely letting people die on the other’
Furthermore euthanasia has been called assisted suicide, however it differs to suicide because a medic carries it out and patients are terminally ill and/or suffering from an acute physical debilitating disability. The reasons and conditions for the decision to die are different and this has been reflected in the legalization of euthanasia in various countries.
The clarification of the practice of euthanasia is important because it draws attention to the language used, which in turn affects understanding of the issue. ... ’
Using a label such as “killing” in relation to euthanasia arouses an emotional response and ultimately fails ‘to determine whether an action is acceptable or unacceptable. ...
The moral issue implied in the discussion is whether euthanasia is right or wrong. ...
Is it not possible that the best course of action or the most virtuous action committed by the most virtuous person is to facilitate euthanasia and end the suffering of a fellow human.
Approximate Word count = 1952
Approximate Pages = 7.8
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
|
|
|
|