Moral Permissibility of Voluntary Active Euthanasia

What Is Voluntary Active Euthanasia?

Voluntary active euthanasia (VAE) can be described as a perfectly competent patient's appeal and request to be aided in the process of dying. This act is completely voluntary and by the choice of the patient due to the medical condition he or she faces. It is an appeal on the part of the patient to be provided with the necessary assistance in ending their own life. There are various methods by which this process may be carried out, including administering a lethal drug, halting a treatment the patient was already undergoing, or providing some other form of assistance. This form of access to ending one's life is referred to as assisted suicide, where the doctor, physician, or person in charge aids the patient in accordance with that patient's own will (Otlowski, 1997).

"Merciton" is one example of assisted suicide, whereby a lethal drug is connected to the patient, who initiates the intake but must be constantly monitored because ongoing assistance is required. Although the process is assisted, it is entirely the patient's choice whether or not to continue, and the physician is involved only to the extent of providing help. The right to make decisions rests wholly with the patient. Voluntary active euthanasia, and any form of assisted suicide, is banned and illegal in most countries due to moral, ethical, and religious reasons. Some countries impose serious legal consequences on those who are found to have participated in or assisted with such an act.

Moral Arguments for Voluntary Active Euthanasia

Although many countries have declared euthanasia illegal and have enforced serious penalties against it, it is still important to consider the other side of the argument and examine why this practice exists and what motivates the people who choose it. Realistically, no one wants to die, and most people wish to live a happy, healthy, and prosperous life. So how do people "voluntarily" choose to end their lives? They must have valid and considered reasons for opting for this course of action.

Consider the scenario of a terminally ill individual suffering from a serious or incurable disease such as cancer or HIV. Even where there are chances of survival, treatment is often an extreme financial drain, and the probability of success may be very small. Treatments such as chemotherapy are also extraordinarily painful — sometimes more painful than the disease itself. Some patients do not wish to endure that pain in order to survive; others feel they have already suffered enough. This is sometimes why people opt for voluntary active euthanasia. It is not that they do not want a healthy life; rather, they feel they cannot endure further pain and have reached the limit of their suffering (Keown, 2002).

Suffering, Financial Burden, and Limited Medical Resources

When considering the severity of a disease, the financial cost of treatment, and the pain involved, it is also reasonable to factor in the age of the patient. Saving a young life may, in some circumstances, be seen as more pressing than prolonging the life of an elderly person who has lived a full life. Every country has limited resources — medical and otherwise — and those resources must be carefully allocated across a large population of patients in need.

There are countless cancer patients who lack the financial means to pay for treatment. Even when treatment is subsidized by the government or other agencies, it may seem preferable to direct those resources toward younger patients who may eventually contribute to the country's development, rather than toward patients who are retired and whose recovery could impose further burden on their families and the broader economy. If the patient themselves opts for voluntary active euthanasia under these circumstances, it is reasonable to consider that option. As a person ages, their physical resilience diminishes and their chances of survival decrease. Patients who understand this reality sometimes choose to end their own suffering and ask for assistance, sparing themselves and their families from an extended and painful decline (Dowbiggin, 2003).

These treatments are rarely straightforward, and in an economy where many families struggle to meet basic needs, the cost of serious medical care can be financially devastating. Even when a family exhausts all of its savings and sells its assets to fund treatment, there is no guarantee of a positive outcome. If the patient does not survive, the family is left in an even more precarious position than before. This is one of the practical realities that makes voluntary active euthanasia a consideration for some patients and families.

It is also important to note that voluntary active euthanasia is not a form of murder, nor is it equivalent to suicide driven by despair. The circumstances are fundamentally different from either of those situations.

Bibliography

Baird, R. M. (1989). Euthanasia: The Moral Issues. Prometheus Books.

Dowbiggin, I. (2003). A Merciful End: The Euthanasia Movement in Modern America. Oxford University Press.

Gorsuch, N. M. (2006). The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia. Princeton University Press.

Keown, J. (2002). Euthanasia, Ethics, and Public Policy: An Argument against Legalisation. Cambridge University Press.

Otlowski, M. (1997). Voluntary Euthanasia and the Common Law. Clarendon Press.