Bioethics Euthanasia
-
Upload
robiaquino1 -
Category
Documents
-
view
237 -
download
0
Transcript of Bioethics Euthanasia
-
8/3/2019 Bioethics Euthanasia
1/17
-
8/3/2019 Bioethics Euthanasia
2/17
BY: BSN-II
AQUINOCO
UMILIN
-
8/3/2019 Bioethics Euthanasia
3/17
Means easy death
From the Greek word
eu-easy and thanatos-death
More strictly, it means painless, peaceful death
It is the deliberate putting to death, in an easy,
painless way, of an individual suffering from anincurable and agonizing disease.
Popularly known as mercy killing
Some call it the art or practice of painlessly putting
to death a person suffering from a marked
deformity or from an unbearable and distressing
disease.
Means easy death
From the Greek word
eu-easy and thanatos-death
More strictly, it means painless, peaceful death
It is the deliberate putting to death, in an easy,
painless way, of an individual suffering from anincurable and agonizing disease.
Popularly known as mercy killing
Some call it the art or practice of painlessly putting
to death a person suffering from a marked
deformity or from an unbearable and distressing
disease.
-
8/3/2019 Bioethics Euthanasia
4/17
- it may be either active (positive) euthanasia, which
in a terminally ill patient will deliberately, directly
terminate his life by employing painless methods-it isan act of commission insofar as it is voluntary and
deliberate
- or passive (negative) euthanasia, which one allows
oneself to die without taking any medicine or by
refusing medical treatment.-it is an act of omission
insofar as one simply refuses to take anything to
sustain life.
-
8/3/2019 Bioethics Euthanasia
5/17
Active and voluntary euthanasia- is one in which either a physician,spouse, or a friend of the patient will terminate the life upon his
request.
Passive and Voluntary euthanasia- one in which a terminally ill patient
is simply allowed to die by the physician, spouse or an immediate
relative, upon the patients request.
Active and nonvoluntary euthanasia- occurs when it is the physician,
spouse or relative, who decides that the life of the terminally ill patient
should be terminated.
Passive and nonvoluntary euthanasia- one in which a terminally ill
patient is simply allowed to die, as requested by the immediate family
members.
-
8/3/2019 Bioethics Euthanasia
6/17
The Problem of Human Dignity
The moral issue of euthanasia revolves around the
preservation of human dignity in death even to the
individuals last breath.
It states that euthanasia aims to preserve human dignity
until death, not only does one have a duty to preserve life,
but has also the duty to die with dignity.
To die with dignity means that one should be able to make
the decision to die when dying would be better than to go
on living with an incurable and distressing sickness.
-
8/3/2019 Bioethics Euthanasia
7/17
The negative side, declares thateuthanasia erodes human dignity.
This is the crossroads of a moral issue:
1) Whereas the positive side insists thatmercy killing preserves human dignity
2) The negative side claims the opposite
since this acts hastens the death of anindividual.
-
8/3/2019 Bioethics Euthanasia
8/17
T. Gary Williams
1. Considers euthanasia to be morally wrong, firstly
because it is an intentional killing and opposes thenatural moral law, or the natural inclination to preservelife.
2. Secondly, euthanasia may be performed for purposes of
self-interest or other consequences. A mistaken diagnosis is always possible, but one may
justify such mistakes through mercy killing once it isconsidered a legitimate practice.
-
8/3/2019 Bioethics Euthanasia
9/17
Recovery from a serious illness requiresthat we fight for our life, so the very
possibility of euthanasia may keep us from
doing just that (Williams calls this the
argument from self-interest).
3. Thirdly, doctors and other health care
professionals may be tempted not to do their
best to save the patient; they may resort to
euthanasia as an easy way out and simplydisregard any other alternatives.
-
8/3/2019 Bioethics Euthanasia
10/17
James Rachel, opts for euthanasia, believing it to be humane
insofar as it allows suffering to be brought to a speedy end.
In his view, whether killing of any kind is right or wrong depends
on the motives and circumstances under which it takes place.
If the intentions and situations are of a certain kind, then active
euthanasia can be deemed morally right.
Similarly, if you simply allow a patient to die when you have some
motive in mind, your act is omission (passive euthanasia)
becomes morally reprehensible.
For Rachel's, both cases (active and passive euthanasia) your
evil intentions have rendered your decisions or actions morally
wrong.
-
8/3/2019 Bioethics Euthanasia
11/17
Philippa Foot endorses both active and passiveeuthanasia, in which patient explicitly gives
consent.
In her view, everyone has the right to life; hence it
is what a person wants that counts.
It is only when a person has decided after battling
some incurable disease, that life is no longer
worth living that both active and passive voluntary
euthanasia can be endorsed and regarded aslegitimate and justified.
-
8/3/2019 Bioethics Euthanasia
12/17
Richard Brandt applies Rosss notion of prima
facie duty not to injure others in his analysis of
the issue.
If someone is in an irreversible coma, all types
of diagnoses have been made to confirm the
hopelessness of the case, the patient is
considered to be beyond injury.
In such a situation, if instructions have been left
for the patients life to be ended painlessly, it
becomes our prima facie obligation to do so
(active and voluntary euthanasia).
Not to follow such a wish would be remiss in
our prima facie obligation to keep others from
further harm or more pain.
-
8/3/2019 Bioethics Euthanasia
13/17
Natural law ethics condemns mercy killing. Euthanasia
is intrinsically wrong because it implies the direct,
deliberate killing of an individual- hence it is murder.
Even though the motive is good, the good does notjustify the evil means in this case. The principle of
stewardship and the inviolability of life may be
appealed to in this connection.
The principle of double effect may be legitimate under
certain circumstances.
-
8/3/2019 Bioethics Euthanasia
14/17
There is no moral obligation to continue medical
treatment if and when a terminally ill patientbecomes hopeless. Even if ones life might be
lengthened through extraordinary measures which
are already useless anyway, it is legitimate to allow
the patient to die as a result of his/her own illness or
injury.
Kants ethics speaks of the human dignity of an
autonomous rational being. As such, we have a
bounden duty to preserve life. Furthermore, a
terminally ill patient in a vegetative state is no
longer an autonomous person with a self-regulatingwill. Hence, by Kantian principles, our duty to
preserve life no longer holds.
-
8/3/2019 Bioethics Euthanasia
15/17
Depending upon how one interprets the utilitarian
principle of utility, it seems that its formulation about the
greatest happiness and benefits for the greatest numberof persons may render euthanasia legitimate.
The Pragmatic Theory of the good and the truth seems
to justify euthanasia in general. It can be argued that
when an individual has been in agony for a long time,and it has become unbearable to go on living in misery
and pain, the most pragmatic moral decision to make is
to put such a useless life to end.
In the light ofRosss ethical principles, under certainconditions or circumstances, one may find it a stringent
prima facie duty to put a comatose patient to an easy
death, depending upon a good motive-e.g. to put an end
to the prolonged suffering of the patient.
-
8/3/2019 Bioethics Euthanasia
16/17
Rawls concept of justice, argues that no
amount of social good or welfare can overridethe inviolability of the individual, it appears as
if euthanasia would be illicit or unacceptable.
However, a persons inviolability demandsthat his dignity be preserved and justice be
served if and when his death would be as
painless and nonviolent as possible.
To let him live and suffer needless pain and
agony would be doing him more injustice
than justice, more harm than good.
-
8/3/2019 Bioethics Euthanasia
17/17
THE END