PHIL101 - Bioethics Assessment One
Student Number : 220107672 Word Count: 2737
Is euthanasia ever morally justified in your view? If so why and under what conditions? If not, why not? Many people have their own judgment on whether a human should have the ability to end their own life, some believe it would be morally acceptable if they were suffering from terminal illness or were in serious un-‐relievable pain, but others believe it is unreasonable to take your own life no matter what the circumstances are. With many moral and ethical stances, there are still many debates across the world as to whether or not Euthanasia could ever be morally justified. There are multiple forms of Euthanasia, these include, Active, Passive, Voluntary and Involuntary. Current Australian laws sometimes allow within the medical profession, the ability for doctors to withdraw or withhold potentially life-‐saving treatment from patients, what we consider passive euthanasia. However they disallow purposely ending the life of the terminally ill, active euthanasia. Throughout Australia, this seems to be accepted and practiced by many medical professions. There are a few ways in which we can argue whether euthanasia can be morally justified or not. When referring just to Active and Passive Euthanasia, we could argue that passive euthanasia can be justified and active not, as withdrawing and withholding treatment so that the patient were to die is more morally correct than purposely killing someone. This brings us to another argument that morally; a doctor refusing to treat a patient resulting in their death is an indirect approach rather then the doctor physically causing death, which is a direct approach. Justifying active and passive euthanasia to be considered different and passive euthanasia being more morally acceptable. However many argue there is really no significant moral differentiation between passive and active euthanasia. Some may say not acting on ones illness is just as much an immoral act
as purposely ending ones life, hence active euthanasia potentially being the preference of the two. Another argument suggesting active euthanasia could never be morally justified is that if we were to permit active euthanasia we would be demoralising our idea of the sanctity of human life sending us into the existence of a 'slippery-‐slope'. The 'slippery-‐slope' is an argument that suggests if voluntary active euthanasia were legalised, it wouldn't take long for involuntary euthanasia to become prominent within our country. This particular argument of the 'slippery-‐slope' can be easily invalidated and active euthanasia justified however, we must consider the sanctity of life and personal autonomy before making such validation. I believe that there is point where Euthanasia can be morally justified and should be legalised world wide under certain conditions. The following will explore the different...