Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
euthanasia ethics and morals
ethics around euthanasia
ethics around euthanasia
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: euthanasia ethics and morals
In 2007, Jack Kevorkian, who is also known as “Dr. Death”, gave a televised interview regarding his views on physician assisted suicide (Neal). He has been released from prison only several months prior to the interview: Kevorkian was ordered to serve a 10 to 25 year long prison sentence for euthanizing over 100 patients between the years of 1990 and 1992 (Neal). By his own admission, Kevorkian administered euthanasia to multiple patients and did so without pangs of conscience. In the highly publicized interview of 2007, Dr. Death quoted an eminent Scottish philosopher David Hume, who famously proclaimed that “no-one throws away a life that is worth keeping” (Neal). When asked to justify his views, Kevorkian made his position clear: the patient has the moral right to decide whether his or her life is worth living, society should never usurp that right from him. To deprive the individual of the liberty to take his or her own life is tantamount to depriving the individual of other inalienable rights such as for example, the right to free expression, or the right to practice a religion of his choice (Neal).
Although Kevorkian’s thesis strikes many Americans as outlandish, if not barbaric, David Hume was not the only eminent philosopher whose ideas can be used to corroborate an argument that physician assisted suicide should be legalized. Another renowned social philosopher, John Stuart Mill famously exclaimed that an individual is always sovereign over his or her body (Pojman). Therefore, an individual should have the liberty to harm him or herself, provided only that the self-inflicting injuries do not cause others to suffer. On this basis, John Stuart Mill defended suicide. The philosophical viewpoints of...
... middle of paper ...
...l three of the aforementioned schools of thought in moral philosophy, it is imperative that physician assisted suicide is administered only under those three conditions.
Works Cited
Crisp, Roger and Slote, Michael. “Virtue Ethics” Oxford: Oxford University Press. Print, 1997.
Neal, Nicole. “Between the Dying and the Dead: Dr. Jack Kevorkian’s life and the Battle for Legalized Euthanasia.” Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Print, 2006.
Pojman, Luis. “Ethics: Discovering Right and Wrong.” New York: Wadsworth Publishing. Print, 2002.
Darwall, Stephen. “Deontology.” New York: Wiley-Blackwell publishing. Print, 2002.
Mulgan, Tim. “Understanding Utilitarianism.” New York: Acumen Publishing. Print, 2007.
Let's mention a known name in the euthanasia field, Dr. Jack Kevorkian. If this name sounds unfamiliar, then you have been one of the lucky few people to have been living in a cave for the last nine years. Dr. Kevorkian is considered to some as a patriarch, here to serve mankind. Yet others consider him to be an evil villain, a devil's advocate so to speak. Physician assisted suicide has not mentioned in the news recently. But just as you are reading this paper and I'm typing, it's happening. This hyperlink will take you to a web page that depicts in depth how many people Dr. Kevorkian has assisted in taking their lives.
Physicians face an ethical dilemma when confronting their patients who are suffering. Many have to choose between abiding by the law or ignoring the law and acting on their own beliefs by assisting in a patient’s suicide. Dr. Jack Kevorkian is certainly one doctor who has taken the illegal route in assisting in many of his patients suicides. In “Killer Doc,” William F. Buckley provides a brief overview of the case and informs his audience of the shocking incidents of Kevorkian’s performed euthanasia on Thomas Youk. In “Offering a Helping Hand to those Who Long to Die,” Mark Nichols compares the famous euthanasia doctors, Dr. Kevorkian and Austrailia’s Dr. Philip Nitschke.
Dworkin, Gerald. " The Nature of Medicine." Euthanasia and Physician Assisted Suicide: For and Against. 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1998.
Jack Kevorkian was a doctor who assisted terminally ill patients to commit suicide. He believed that they had the right to die in an appropriate way; to die with dignity. He therefore invented a machine (called thanatron—a Greek word for death machine) which could take away his patients’ lives painlessly and efficiently, all they had to do was to push a button and their lives would be ended by either deadly injection or carbon monoxide poisoning. There had been at least one hundred patients who tried and died in this method. Dr. Kevorkian was charged several times with murder in these deaths. Lucky for him, a judge dismissed one of his charges because there was no evidence of murder. Jury did not find him guilty either. Nevertheless, he received numerous critics from medical professionals and media. Some people considered him as a hero while others saw him as an evil person. Not few questioned his intention; did he really care about ending his patients’ sufferings? Now that the “Dr. Death” died, all of this debate probably doesn’t matter anymore. But if it was up to me, I would most definitely not going to let him go with this easily because the way I see it, what he did was not right.
Braddock and Tonelli. “Physician-Assisted Suicide.” Ethics in Medicine University of Washington Medical School. 2008. .
Potts, Stephen G.. "Euthanasia Should Not Be Legalized." Euthanasia: Opposing Viewpoints. Bernards, Neal. ed. San Diego. Greenhaven Press, Inc. 1989.
Cotton, Paul. "Medicine's Position Is Both Pivotal And Precarious In Assisted Suicide Debate." The Journal of the American Association 1 Feb. 1995: 363-64.
Schneider Keith, “DR. Jack Kevorkian Dies at 83; A Doctor who helped End Lives”. The New York Times. Arthur Sulzberger Jr. 3, June 2011. Online Newspaper 2014
Smith, Wesley J. "Assisted Suicide Will Not Remain Restricted to the Terminally Ill." Assisted Suicide. Ed. Sylvia Engdahl. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2009. Current Controversies. Rpt. from "Death on Demand: The Assisted-Suicide Movement Sheds Its Fig Leaf." Weekly Standard (5 July 2007). Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 9 Feb. 2014.
According to West’s Encyclopedia of American Law, between 1990 and 1999, a well-known advocate for physician assisted suicide, Jack Kevorkian helped 130 patients end their lives. He began the debate on assisted suicide by assisting a man with committing suicide on national television. According to Dr. Kevorkian, “The voluntary self-elimination of individual and mortally diseased or crippled lives taken collectively can only enhance the preservation of public health and welfare” (Kevorkian). In other words, Kevor...
The ethical debate regarding euthanasia dates back to ancient Greece and Rome. It was the Hippocratic School (c. 400B.C.) that eliminated the practice of euthanasia and assisted suicide from medical practice. Euthanasia in itself raises many ethical dilemmas – such as, is it ethical for a doctor to assist a terminally ill patient in ending his life? Under what circumstances, if any, is euthanasia considered ethically appropriate for a doctor? More so, euthanasia raises the argument of the different ideas that people have about the value of the human experience.
“In 1999, Dr. Jack Kevorkian, a Michigan physician known for openly advertising that he would perform assisted suicide despite the fact that it was illegal, was convicted of second-degree murder” (Lee). The fact of the matter is human being...
Physician -assisted suicide has been a conflict in the medical field since pre- Christian eras, and is an issue that has resurfaced in the twentieth century. People today are not aware of what the term physician assisted suicide means, and are opposed to listening to advocates’ perspectives. Individuals need to understand that problems do not go away by not choosing to face them. This paper’s perspective of assisted suicide is that it is an option to respect the dignity of patients, and only those with deathly illness are justified for this method.
Larson, Edward J. “Legalizing Euthanasia Would Encourage Suicide” Euthanasia- Opposing Viewpoints. Ed. Carol Wesseker. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1995. 78-83. Print.
Mill’s utilitarianism, it is evident that absolute morality is necessary to understand Dr. Kevorkian’s actions. Utilitarianism would argue that terminally ill patients would inevitably die and in accordance to the Hippocratic Code, the patients’ welfare and financial state must be taken into consideration by the physician.(Cahn 575) They would argue using the Greatest Happiness Principle where morality is measured on the happiness it creates for the individual making the decision. Utilitarianism would focus on Dr. Kevorkian’s intentions as being moral by supporting his patients’ suicide. They would argue that he helped his patients avoid the financial burden and suffering of their illness through suicide. Although some validity is evident, they disregard the possibility that Dr. Kevorkian may have been wrong in his diagnosis and acted immorally in his failure to keep his patients alive through his decisions. If the utilitarianism decide to interpret the Hippocratic Oath as a reason for Dr. Kevorkian’s decision to kill his patients, they avoid questioning the implications of Dr. Kevorkian’s decisions on his role as a physician. By acting outside of good will, he violated his role as physician to keep his patients alive since “prevention is better than cure” by giving himself the power to play God. He did so by crossing the boundary that prevents healers from taking life from his/her patients and thus stepped into the realm of executioner rather than healer. (Lasagna) For Dr. Kevorkian to decide when his patients can die, he not only violated the Hippocratic Oath, but led to question the role of the physician whose job is to treat the sick and not determine when a person could die. Although he have granted his patients what they wanted and believed that he was acting in his role as a physician, the outcome reinforces Kant’s philosophy to act in an absolute