Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
This can ultimately become the justification for refusal to euthanize a person even if they have given their permission. While the rights of the individual must be respected, even if they wish to die, others cannot, must not, accede to the individuals' wishes if they do not agree with it. The underlying basis of euthanasia must be the ending of a life who's continuance is generally accepted as an "evil." Many times the individual seeking to be euthanized, because they are at the center of the issue, cannot make an objective decision about their future. And since they need the assistance of others to complete the act of euthanasia, it is up to the others to refuse to euthanize a person they feel is not continuing a life that can be considered "evil."
This leads to the question of when does the continuance of a life constitute an "evil," and Foot's argument on this subject can be broken down to a single point, "can we think that the prolonging of this life would be a benefit to him…." (Foot, p.3) Cutting through all the rhetoric, when discussing euthanasia, this is the fundamental question that those involved in the act must ask. If the answer to this important question is yes, then it can be considered to be morally acceptable to assist in a euthanasia event. And while this is not...
If their wishes are known, and they have willingly consented to being euthanized, then Foot asserts that there is no moral issue in assisting when the conditions are appropriate; meaning when the continuance of life is no longer beneficial. However, when the person's wishes are not known a moral dilemma is raised. Foot comes to the conclusion that there is never a justified reason to actively end a life when the person refuses to consent, however, in other cases, most particularly when the wishes are not known but it is generally assumed that the continuance of the life would constitute an "evil," active and passive forms of euthanasia "are sometimes compatible with both justice and charity." (Foot, p.9) Therefore, according to Foot, it is possible to euthanize someone without their consent, but not when they have let their wishes be known prior, or are capable of actively opposing their own death; only when their wishes are unknown and the continuance of their life is considered to be an "evil."
References
Foot, Philippa. (1977). "Euthanasia." Philosophy and Public Affairs, 7(2). Print.
I believe that the most important factor which supports the argument according to which euthanasia should be your legal right is represented by the individual's right and freedom to choose. And by this I mean that all people ought to be allowed the right to this sort of decision and not only the ones who are terminally ill. For example, people in an advanced state of Alzheimer or people who
Euthanasia is a difficult topic for many people, and opinions about it are often very strong. These opinions generally fall into two distinct categories: those who think everyone should have the right to choose, and those who think the practice should be completely illegal. There are several reasons why people have these deep-seated views regarding the issue, and it is important to address those in order to facilitate a better
The most reported cases involved cancer patients, and in the majority of the cases, the procedure was conducted at home (Euthanasia pp). Oregon is the only state that has legalized physician-assisted suicide, as residents voted for it at the Oregon Ballot Measure 16 in 1994, and voted against repealing it at the Oregon Ballot Measure 51 in 1997, however the state law has been attacked by a variety of organizations,
Euthanasia has long been considered a compelling issue based on religious beliefs for which there are serious legal and ethical consequences. Those who support Euthanasia argue that it is the only viable solution for many people who do not desire to end their lives in a miserable fashion. They believe that terminating life by choice is the best possible resolution. On the other hand, many individuals believe that Euthanasia is
The philosophy for example recognizes that more than one person is involved in the euthanasia process. The person in most physical distress is the one afflicted with illness and requiring euthanasia as a solution. What deontology does not recognize is the suffering of family members. Consequentialism also considers the suffering of family members, who are emotionally and mentally distressed by observing the long-term suffering of the ill person. They
Euthanasia Moral Philosophy: Euthanasia Euthanasia has been a hotly debated topic, off and on, for several decades. Public opinion was enflamed by the case of Dr. Kevorkian, in which the doctor claimed to be helping people claim their right to a dignified death. Euthanasia, also termed assisted suicide, has colored the moral discussions of individuals since the time of early philosophers. In taking a view point, people usually choose a philosophy based