When people are faced with an ethical dilemma the way they react will show their true character, it may be good, bad, ugly or a little bit of both. During our lives, every single person will come face to face with a decision that will test their values and their belief systems. Euthanasia or doctor assisted suicide is a hot topic in the world today, many states are voting on whether a person has the right to choose to end his or her own life. In this paper, I will discuss euthanasia from a Christian worldview and will examine how someone with an atheist worldview might see this same dilemma.
Ethical Dilemma
A young girl of seventeen, Joni, suddenly finds herself a paraplegic after a tragic swimming accident. As she spirals into depression,
…show more content…
Commandment six of the ten commandments given to Moses for Christians to follow is very straight forward; you shall not murder means you shall not take your own life or the life of another. Euthanasia is in direct conflict with the sixth commandment, even though some may argue that it’s humane to end suffering it is still defying a fundamental law set out by God. God gave us life therefore God is the only one who has the authority to end our lives, “as no one has power over the wind to contain it, so no one has power over the time of their death. As no one is discharged in time of war, so wickedness will not release those who practice it” (Ecclesiastes 8:8). Christians believe that if God calls on you to suffer you endure the suffering by relying on His strength. David Mills says it well, “The Father expects you to suffer if you are given suffering and to put up with indignities if you are given indignities. The Lord gives and the Lord takes away; blessed be the name of the Lord” (Mills, 16). Thus, God knows Joni’s purpose and He knows why she is suffering but it is His will and she must come to terms with that. If a Christian were faced with this situation, their only option would be life. Christian’s trust that God is in control, that He is more than capable of taking care of His people and although He allows adversity He has a …show more content…
I believe that given enough time and a good support system Joni would realize that she suffered through this agonizing experience because God wanted to use her for something great. Although she has a future to fulfill the purpose God set out for her, she could become depressed and withdrawn from society and potentially give up on her faith and God. As the lecture mentions, “the only certain way to free oneself from evil is to run to the Light of Christ who is the Light of the World,” (“Lecture 6,” 2017) the only way for Joni to find the light of Christ is to reject the darkness of the enemy. The biggest benefit of her choosing life is time; time to figure out what her purpose is and time to recognize that God’s way is the only
Euthanasia and assisted suicide is known as a process in which an individual (sick or disabled) engages in an act that leads to his or her own death with the help of physicians or family members to end pain and suffering. There are several other terms used for this process, such as active euthanasia or passive euthanasia. Active euthanasia refers to what is being done to actively end life while passive euthanasia is referred as eliminating a treatment that will prolong a patient’s life, which will eventually lead to death (Levy et al., 2103, p. 402). Euthanasia and assisted suicide pose a significant ethical issue today, and understanding the issue requires examining the different principles, such as the ethical issue, professional code of conduct, strength and limitations, autonomy and informed consent, beneficence and nonmaleficence, distribution, and confidentiality and truthfulness.
Any discussion that pertains to the topic of euthanasia must first include a clear definition of the key terms and issues. With this in mind, it should be noted that euthanasia includes both what has been called physician-assisted "suicide" and voluntary active euthanasia. Physician-assisted suicide involves providing lethal medication(s) available to the patient to be used at a time of the patient’s own choosing (Boudreau, p.2, 2014). Indifferently, voluntary active euthanasia involves the physician taking an active role in carrying out the patient’s request, and usually involves intravenous delivery of a lethal substance. Physician-assisted suicide is felt to be easier psychologically for the physician and patient than euthanasia because
As a member of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, I feel it important to express in this essay the stand of the church on the question of euthanasia and assisted suicide. Our church has strong biblical and traditional reasons for adamantly opposing these new end-of-life approaches.
Societies frequently reject the use of euthanasia because of the way in which it violates ethics. This is a major concern in the field of religion; along with other religions and religious leaders, Willem Velema of the Orthodox Protestant Church was “fiercely opposed” to the idea of euthanizing (Boer). From a religious standpoint, this procedure is wrong because patients and their families can act as God by determining time of death. Religion teaches that God keeps His children on the earth for a reason. After all, God puts certain obstacles in one’s life in order to make them stronger; resorting to death is a sign of weakness. Euthanasia is also opposed by many because of the way people take advantage of it. In Belgium, where Euthanization is legal, the number of medically induced deaths “has been going up” tremendously (Boer). In fact, “it has increased by an average of 15% a year” since 2006 (Boer). As numbers increase, citizens become desensitized to the idea, therefore, viewing it as a viable option in the face of pain.
"People are stewards, not owners, of the life God has entrusted to them" (Vaticana, 550). To decide if euthanasia is wrong, one must first decide whom life belongs to. The Bible says, "In God's hand is the life of every living thing and the breath of all mankind" (Job 12:10). Life belongs to God and since God gave life to the human race, God should decide when it is time to take life. Also, the fifth commandment says, "Thou shall not kill." Assisted suicide and euthanasia disobey this commandment.
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.
In this essay, I will discuss whether euthanasia is morally permissible or not. Euthanasia is the intention of ending life due to inevitable pain and suffering. The word euthanasia comes from the Greek words “eu,” which means good, and “thanatosis, which means death. There are two types of euthanasia, active and passive. Active euthanasia is when medical professionals deliberately do something that causes the patient to die, such as giving lethal injections. Passive euthanasia is when a patient dies because the medical professionals do not do anything to keep them alive or they stop doing something that was keeping them alive. Some pros of euthanasia is the freedom to decide your destiny, ending the pain, and to die with dignity. Some cons
In the essay “The Morality of Euthanasia”, James Rachels uses what he calls the argument from mercy. Rachels states, “If one could end the suffering of another being—the kind from which we ourselves would recoil, about which we would refuse to read or imagine—wouldn’t one?” He cites a Stewart Alsop’s story in which he shares a room with a terminally ill cancer patient who he named Jack. At the end of the recounting, Alsop basically asks, “were this another animal, would not we see to it that it doesn’t suffer more than it should?” Which opens up the question of, “Why do humans receive special treatment when we too are animals?” We would not let animals suffer when there is a low chance of survival, so why is it different for us humans?
As patients come closer to the end of their lives, certain organs stop performing as well as they use to. People are unable to do simple tasks like putting on clothes, going to the restroom without assistance, eat on our own, and sometimes even breathe without the help of a machine. Needing to depend on someone for everything suddenly brings feelings of helplessness much like an infant feels. It is easy to see why some patients with terminal illnesses would seek any type of relief from this hardship, even if that relief is suicide. Euthanasia or assisted suicide is where a physician would give a patient an aid in dying. “Assisted suicide is a controversial medical and ethical issue based on the question of whether, in certain situations, Medical practioners should be allowed to help patients actively determine the time and circumstances of their death” (Lee). “Arguments for and against assisted suicide (sometimes called the “right to die” debate) are complicated by the fact that they come from very many different points of view: medical issues, ethical issues, legal issues, religious issues, and social issues all play a part in shaping people’s opinions on the subject” (Lee). Euthanasia should not be legalized because it is considered murder, it goes against physicians’ Hippocratic Oath, violates the Controlled
Throughout history, euthanasia has been used as a way to relieve a patient from an incurable illness or from living a life of unbearable pain. Many cultures, such as the ancient Greek and Roman civilizations, did not oppose one’s decision to end his life rather than living with agonizing pain.3 During this time period, this choice was commonplace. A few ancient philosophers, who believed that the ending of a human life belonged to the gods only, met it with objection. When the Christian era began, the subject was rarely discussed or practiced because of the strong trust and faith held in God and his divine command. It was not until the eighteenth century Enlightenment period that new ideas favoring euthanasia were put forth by philosophers and other prominent figures such as Samuel Williams and David Hume.4 By the close of the 1800’s...
Because passive euthanasia is accepted by the American Medical Association in cases where it is clear the patient has no reasonable hope of living without the aid of a machine, passive euthanasia is not as controversial as active euthanasia. This paper will focus on the controversial morality issues regarding active voluntary or involuntary euthanasia, the ending of a persons life by lethal injection with or without the patients consent. Unless oth...
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.
More than likely, a good majority of people have heard about euthanasia at least once in their lifetime. For those out there who have been living under a rock their entire lives, euthanasia “is generally understood to mean the bringing about of a good death – ‘mercy killing’, where one person, ‘A’, ends the life of another person, ‘B’, for the sake of ‘B’.” (Kuhse 294). There are people who believe this is a completely logical scenario that should be allowed, and there are others that oppose this view. For the purpose of this essay, I will be defending those who are suffering from euthanasia.
As we all know, medical treatment can help save lives. But is there a medical treatment that would actually help end life? Although it's often debated upon, the procedure is still used to help the aid of a patient's death. Usually dubbed as mercy killing, euthanasia is the "practice of ending a life so as to release an individual from an incurable disease or intolerable suffering" (Encarta). My argument over this topic is that euthanasia should have strict criteria over the use of it. There are different cases of euthanasia that should be looked at and different point of views that should be considered. I will be looking into VE (Voluntary Euthanasia), which involves a request by the dying patient or that person's legal representative. These different procedures are as follows: passive or negative euthanasia, which involves not doing something to prevent death or allowing someone to die and active or positive euthanasia which involves taking deliberate action to cause a death. I have reasons to believe that passive or negative euthanasia can be a humane way of end suffering, while active or positive euthanasia is not.
The most common argument for Euthanasia, is the idea of quality of life. This term was first created in the 1970’s as a term used to describe, the general welfare of a individual. This was gradually adopted as a term to describe a persons overall existence. This ideology, has practically become the argument used to morally justify the killings of hundreds upon thousands of unborn babies, who have genetic defects such as down syndrome and the international starving of brain damaged adults and terminally ill patients. To Christian, this argument has no meaning as we were all created in the image of God and it is believed that each human has a purpose to serve. They see each human as having its own intrinsic worth and to destroy any life, whether a young born child or an elderly person is the murder of a potential. The Christians also mock the quality of life argument as they believe that it is a biased opinion and we have no grounds or framework to judge by. The book of Job, argues against the quality of life argument. In this book, Job claims that suffering is part of being human along with happiness, sadness and anger. This points that if you are suffering, you should live through it and it will make you a stronger person. Paul says in Corinthians 2, For when I am weak then I am strong. He says this when he is trying to describe how he appreciates his “problem/thorn in his flesh” because although he wanted God to take it away he realises that it helps to make him a stronger person and a good Christian, because it reminds him to be humble. It is based upon this that he refuses to take his own life. The Christian sees a good life in respects to a persons response, to a particular situations, whereas the humanists will see only in terms of suffering and pain experienced.