Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Euthanasia moral issues
Determining decision making
Ethical dilemma case studies
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Euthanasia moral issues
Decision-making is one of the hardest tasks individuals have to endure. Deciphering between whether or not the decision you make will benefit you, if it will hurt someone else, what are the pros, the cons, and if the decision you make is eleven moral in itself. When decision-making the study of ethics plays a major role as to which decision you ultimately decide on. Ethics evaluates the morality of actions based on principles set by theories, individuals or in some instances cultures. Morality is an enormous part of decision=making which comes into play every single day in human life. Ethicists create theories based on the morality that exists in our lives in regards to certain situations. In particular, the utilitarian theory is well known …show more content…
Consequentialism analyzes a situation morality based upon the consequences that may come and those that could happen. An example from philosopher Kai Nielsen, came up with an example of the fat man that was stuck in the cave, with seven other people who happened to have a stick of dynamite. There is tidal wave that is coming and in one situation, either all seven of them will die, or in another situation they can blow up the fat man in order to escape the cave. In both of these situations there is a severe moral issue being tested, which is murder, in this case the consequence is either that seven people will die, or only one person will die. Ultimately, the fat man would be killed in order to save the lives of the seven others rather than to just save the fat man. The utilities of these seven will be higher from the fat man’s peril than from just saving the innocent fat man. According to utilitarianism, in order to evaluate a situation the utilities and disutilities involved must be weighed against another and be measured to come up with the net utility involved with the situation at hand. Surprisingly, in some situations the decision may cause pain, but the decision would cause less pain compared to the other option that was being considered. In addition, the foundation of utilitarianism, the principle of utility, is …show more content…
Utilitarianism can deal with all moral issues that may arise, such as abortion, the death penalty, and euthanasia. For a vision into utilitarian’s mind when deliberating whether or not an action is moral, we shall discuss how a utilitarian deals with euthanasia. Euthanasia, also known as assisted suicide, is a practice used to allow terminal patients to die with the assistance of their physician. An individual that is not aware of utilitarianism may dismiss the idea of euthanasia completely due to how vile it seems, but a utilitarian would consider the consequences from the situation, and the overall satisfaction from being euthanized before ruling it as immoral completely. The only consequences of this situation, is ultimately death, which is more immediate than watching the terminal patient suffer through the illness to the end, which could be prolonged and extremely painful. If euthanasia provides satisfaction to the patient, they will be put out of the pain and misery they are living through, then the procedure is morally correct under utilitarianism. To a utilitarian, euthanasia is morally okay as long as the correct methods are used to measure whether or not there is more pleasure or pain associated with
Utilitarianism argues that, we need to consider how much overall happiness of the action could bring, considering everyone involved. For example, how will Brittany’s choice for euthanasia affect her husband, friend, and parents? In Craig’s case, how will his choice for euthanasia affect his wife, son, and daughter? In both of their cases, that devastation that they will die is already difficult for them, and their families. Craig’ wife and his two children were sad that he was making the decision to die before his illness consumed him. Her daughter speaks on how hard it was for her, and in a sense relieved, she was not present when her father took his own life. Brittany was a newlywed, it was extremely sad for her husband and brother in law to know she was taking her life beforehand. To make a choice an act-utilitarian would need to balance out the overall happiness compared to the suffering. Both Brittany and Craig will eventually die. If they both let their terminal illness progress they would inflict extreme suffering on themselves and their family as they witnessed their pain. In Craig’s case, his illness will get worst it will cause paralysis. His major concern was on how would he be able to let
I will begin by looking at the first claim that states that the consequential nature of utilitarianism is inappropriate. According to this argument, actions are judged according to the resulting consequences on the individual who undertook the actions without considering who motivated the actions. I will argue that this claim is wrong. This is because if the actions are morally up right, they will also produce the best consequences compared to any other actions. In my opinion utilitarianism is effective in shaping the behavioral character of the society as maximization of the good actions as well as minimization of evil deeds is
“Michael Manning, MD, in his 1998 book Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide: Killing or Caring?, traced the history of the word euthanasia: ‘The term euthanasia.originally meant only 'good death,'but in modern society it has come to mean a death free of any anxiety and pain, often brought about through the use of medication.” It seems there has always been some confusion and questions from our society about the legal and moral questions regarding the new science of euthanasia. “Most recently, it has come to mean'mercy killing' — deliberately putting an end to someone’s life in order to spare the individual’s suffering.’” I would like to emphasize the words “to spare the individual’s suffering”.
In Peter Singer’s peer-reviewed article, Voluntary Euthanasia: A Utilitarian Perspective, he argues that based on a Utilitarian philosophy, voluntary euthanasia should be legal. This article relies upon defining a Utilitarian perspective that leads him to his conclusion. He uses multiple thought experiments that are intended to open an alternate way of viewing the debate of euthanasia as well as data and statistics from Oregon and the Netherlands to support his claims. He includes the 19th century utilitarian, John Stuart Mill, who argues that individuals are “ultimately the best judges and guardians of their own interests”. Shown in his famous example, “if you see people about to cross a bridge you know to be unsafe, you may forcibly stop
In review, euthanasia is performed when the pain is too much for the patient. It is, overall, the patient’s life—their right and their choice. Everyone deserves to die compassionately, knowing that they will slip away painlessly. Everyone deserves to have a choice, especially when it comes to the manner of their death. If euthanasia is not legalized, many people will debilitating illnesses may take their lives in much more horrific ways. If they want the suffering to end badly enough, it is simply done one way or
What is ethics? Ethics are the philosophical principles of good verses bad moral behavior. It is a guideline to help people make decisions or make a judgment calls. There are two main types of ethical principles that will be discussed in this paper, and how they are applied to the decision making process. They are Deontological and Utilitarian. Deontological ethics are based on the righteousness or wrongness of the action-taking place. It does not base itself on the bad or good consequences that come from the action. Immanuel Kant introduced deontological ethics in the 18th century. Kant believed that every decision or action made by a person had to be evaluated by his or her moral duty. He stated that humanity shouldn’t side on its
The first moral theory studied in the course this semester was classical utilitarianism. Utilitarianism at its base argument is the attempt to maximize utility. When a person uses the moral theory of utilitarianism, they are looking at that action that benefits the most people or that has the higher good for the most people. Utilitarianism say that a person does a certain action that helps or benefits a higher number of people then that action is moral good. Before discussing Utilitarianism further, there is a need to explain what it has to do with consequentialism. Consequentialism is when a person looks at actions or something that someone does and judges that action based of the criteria that of consequences that action brings. To a consequentialist the only way for an action to be moral good the action itself and what the outcome it brings must be good. Let’s say that person is talking a final on Tuesday and decides to bring a bag of candy to the whole class during their final to have something to keep them up. If this action was to benefit the whole class and that action brings good consequence than that action is morally right to a consequ...
Utilitarianism is an ethical system that states that one should make moral choices based on which moral option brings the most pleasure and for the most people. This system is a consequentialist one, meaning that means or actions do not matter; only the consequences or results of one’s actions determine if the choice made was morally right or wrong. Actions and decisions can only be evaluated by the results they produce. If someone’s actions result in more pain than pleasure, then that action is determined to be a morally wrong one; if an action results in the most pleasure for the most people, then it is considered morally good. This system can be hard to apply when evaluating and weighing moral options since it is a consequentialist system;
Let us discuss consequentialism first. Consequentialism focuses on consequences as the most important factor in the decision making process (Donaldson 3). For consequentialists the motives of an act are not as important as what comes out of it. Utilitarianism is one of the branches of consequentialism. Utilitarianism believes in the greatest good for the number (Donaldson 3). This method along with egoist consequentialism was probably the one that w...
Today, medical interventions have made it possible to save or prolong lives, but should the process of dying be left to nature? (Brogden, 2001). Phrases such as, “killing is always considered murder,” and “while life is present, so is hope” are not enough to contract with the present medical knowledge in the Canadian health care system, which is proficient of giving injured patients a chance to live, which in the past would not have been possible (Brogden, 2001). According to Brogden, a number of economic and ethical questions arise concerning the increasing elderly population. This is the reason why the Canadian society ought to endeavor to come to a decision on what is right and ethical when it comes to facing death. Uhlmann (1998) mentions that individuals’ attitudes towards euthanasia differ. From a utilitarianism point of view – holding that an action is judged as good or bad in relation to the consequence, outcome, or end result that is derived from it, and people choosing actions that will, in a given circumstance, increase the overall good (Lum, 2010) - euthanasia could become a means of health care cost containment, and also, with specific safeguards and in certain circumstances the taking of a human life is merciful and that all of us are entitled to end our lives when we see fit.
Utilitarianism is a moral theory that has long been the subject of philosophical debate. This theory, when practiced, appears to set a very basic guideline to follow when one is faced with a moral dilemma. Fundamental Utilitarianism states that when a moral dilemma arises, one should take action that causes favorable results or reduces less favorable results. If these less favorable results, or pain, occur from this action, it can be justified if it is produced to prevent more pain or produce happiness. Stating the Utilitarian view can summarize these basic principles: "the greatest good for the greatest number". Utilitarians are to believe that if they follow this philosophy, that no matter what action they take, it will be the correct one if it achieves useful results. Williams says that utilitarianism can sometimes bring about undesirable outcomes because of the fact that it forces one to violate his/her convictions or "lower-order projects" which in turn cannot account for integrity or "coherently describe the relations between man's projects and his actions (Singer: 340)."
The act of euthanasia may be justifiable, in that it gives those in pain an escape from their lives, however, it places a lot of power in the patient’s healthcare provider. Medical professionals are more pessimistic in patients’ diagnosis and rate their live value lower than it actually is (Pawlick and DiLascio 2). The negative diagnosis of these medical practitioners makes the patient feel especially drawn to euthanasia as a solution for the problem they may possess. Furthermore, the legalization of euthanasia would “cause society to devalue all life,” in that it makes everyone, not just patients, feel that euthanizing those who have medical issues is a better way to fix problems within our society, rather than treating them (Wekesser 64). Those against legalization say that the open availability for someone to end their life could lead to people feeling “more driven toward, or even forced” to be euthanized due to their emotional, rather than physical, pain (Lee and Stingl 1). During times of hardship such as a terminal illness, one often feels that their life is decreasing in value under the circumstances of the effective suffering their situation causes to the family and loves ones around them. It is therefore easier to end their life in a way that puts ease on the family and loved ones, in a
Consequentialism is an extremely influential ethical system that most people don’t know they are using. Consequentialism can be very difficult to understand if explained in complex fashion, but it's actually very simple. This ethical system mainly consists of people thinking about the consequences before performing an action; furthermore one example of this could be thinking what the consequences could be if you didn't study for a test. The possibility of getting a bad grade would force many people to study. This idea of consequentialism has been around the planet for many years. Consequentialism is very similar to utilitarianism and is believed to be just recently called two different philosophies. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy
The applied ethical issue of euthanasia, or mercy killing, concerns whether it is morally permissible for a third party, such as a physician, to end the life of a terminally ill patient who is in intense pain. The word euthanasia comes from the Greek words eu (‘well’) and thanatos (‘death’). It means a painless and gentle death. But in modern usage, it has come to imply that someone’s life is ended for compassionate reasons by some passive or active steps taken by another person. The euthanasia controversy is part of a larger issue concerning the right to die. Staunch defenders of personal liberty argue that all of us are morally entitled to end our lives when we see fit. Thus, according to these people, euthanasia is in principle morally permissible. Two additional concepts are relevant to the discussion of euthanasia. First, voluntary euthanasia refers to mercy killing that takes place with the explicit and voluntary consent of the patient, either verbally or in a written document such as a living will. Second, non-voluntary euthanasia refers to the mercy killing of a patient who is unconscious, comatose, or otherwise unable to explicitly make his intentions known. (Downing 1969) In these cases it is often family members who make the request. It is important not to confuse non-voluntary mercy killing with involuntary mercy killing. The latter would be done against the wishes of the patient and would clearly count as murder.
The life of a human being is a gift. To treat it in any other way would be degrading life’s inherent worth. Many different moral dilemmas are associated with human euthanasia. The extreme ends of the controversial subject suggests, by the advocates, that euthanasia, or physician-assisted suicide, is a type of mercy killing. On the other end, such assistance, or methods, are considered as a form of murder. As a “mercy killing”, people often inaccurately voice that human euthanasia is in a patient's best interests, disregarding the threats of: the slippery slope effect, no regulatory system, and sanctity of life infringement.