1 / 11

Euthanasia Debate: Moral, Legal, and Ethical Considerations

Explore the nuanced arguments surrounding euthanasia, from definitions and agent roles to ethical reasoning, with insights on autonomy, quality of care, and the slippery slope argument. Dive into landmark legal cases that have shaped the discourse on assisted suicide and right to die issues.

damita
Download Presentation

Euthanasia Debate: Moral, Legal, and Ethical Considerations

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide Odyssey: UNIV 300I Fall 2006 California State University, Long Beach

  2. Defining “euthanasia” (merciful death) • Taking a human life • Person must be suffering disease or injury from which recovery is hopeless • Action must be deliberate and intentional

  3. Euthanasia vs. Assisted Suicide • Who is the ‘agent’? Who does the killing? Who terminates the life? • Euthanasia: A second person is the agent • Assisted suicide: The person whose life is ending is the agent (with some help from another who provides the means)

  4. Central issues re: euthanasia • “Personhood” • Definition of “death” • Ordinary vs. extraordinary treatment • Active killing vs. passively allowing to die • Voluntary vs. nonvoluntary euthanasia • Assisted suicide v. euthanasia • Right to refuse treatment • Defective newborns

  5. Types of reasoning • Kantian: respect for the dignity of persons • Utilitarian: consideration of results or consequences of actions

  6. Arguments against euthanasia • Euthanasia is inherently wrong as it violates the nature and dignity of persons • Euthanasia is wrong from standpoint of self-interest: Death is final and irreversible • Mistaken diagnosis? Mistaken prognosis? • New treatment? Spontaneous remission? • Possibility of euthanasia might make us give up too easily • Pressure of emotional and financial burden on families • Euthanasia in wrong from standpoint of practical effects: • Corrupting influence on medical professionals • Overall decline in quality of medical care • Slippery slope from voluntary to nonvoluntary euthanasia

  7. Arguments in support • Right to individual autonomy, dignity, liberty to make our own decisions • Obligation to relieve suffering in others • Assumes proper conditions • Assumes meaningful consent and truly voluntary decision

  8. American Medical AssociationHouse of Delegates • Active euthanasia: Mercy killing: intentional termination of the life of one human being by another = contrary to policy of AMA • Passive: cessation of employment of extraordinary means to prolong life when irrefutable evidence that biological death is imminent: decision of patient, family, with advice of physician

  9. Governor Bush v. Michael Schiavo (Florida, 2004) • Previous decisions: voluntary euthanasia request by Terri Schiavo • Issue: constitutionality of law passed by Fla legislature giving governor authority to reinsert feed tubes • Holding: law violates separation of powers • Reasoning: basis of our system of government: legislature, executive, judiciary

  10. Washington v. Glucksberg (1997) • Issue: Does state law banning assisted suicide violate Federal liberty interest protected by 14th Am. due process clause? • Holding: As liberty interest does not extend to assisted suicide, state law is not unconstitutional • Reasoning: liberty interests are limited to fundamental rights which re objectively, deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition

  11. Vacco v. Quill (1997) • Issue: Is it a denial of equal protection if active assisted suicide is banned, while passive refusal of treatment is permitted • Holding: The NY law banning assisted suicide does not violate the constitutional right of equal protection • Reasoning: Difference between “letting die” and “making die” is important, logical, rational, well-established. Thus, there is no equal protection violation to treat them differently under the law.

More Related