Euthanasia: Is It Moral?
EUTHANSIA
Hal Morrissey Gillman
How far do you agree that sanctity of life is the most important consideration in decisions about the morality of euthanasia?
When the question of whether the act of euthanasia – that is, helping someone who is in suffering, to die in a medical context – is moral, there are various considerations to be made relating to various ethical and religious stances. These include the effect the procedure has on the medical profession and doctors within it, the potential for a slippery slope leading to a more common acceptance of such practices, social pressures, assessing the quality of the individual’s life, and whether the law should be able to breach people’s autonomy in the way that many argue euthanasia does. However, the most common consideration, given by many religions that are against the process, is sanctity of life – in other words, the intrinsic value of life. This essay will analyse three specific stances; sanctity of life, quality of life, and autonomy, whilst giving both sides of the argument on each point, and then arriving at a balanced conclusion after assessing all of the pros and cons.
Firstly, the issue of sanctity of life will be discussed. It is the view of many religions, the strongest of which is Catholicism, that life is inherently valuable regardless of condition or quality. As is often the case with Christianity, this view has arisen from passages of the bible that, though not specifically speaking on euthanasia, speak of how all life is worthwhile, and that “life is a gift from God”[1], meaning it should never be rejected or taken away, as this is the sole right of God. This is emphasised in Exodus 20:13 of the bible, which reads “you shall not kill” which, though rather general, does clearly state that one should not end another’s life, no matter what the circumstance. This is in fact one of the main strengths of this point of view; it is clear cut, absolutist, and easy for followers to understand. It
Hal Morrissey Gillman
How far do you agree that sanctity of life is the most important consideration in decisions about the morality of euthanasia?
When the question of whether the act of euthanasia – that is, helping someone who is in suffering, to die in a medical context – is moral, there are various considerations to be made relating to various ethical and religious stances. These include the effect the procedure has on the medical profession and doctors within it, the potential for a slippery slope leading to a more common acceptance of such practices, social pressures, assessing the quality of the individual’s life, and whether the law should be able to breach people’s autonomy in the way that many argue euthanasia does. However, the most common consideration, given by many religions that are against the process, is sanctity of life – in other words, the intrinsic value of life. This essay will analyse three specific stances; sanctity of life, quality of life, and autonomy, whilst giving both sides of the argument on each point, and then arriving at a balanced conclusion after assessing all of the pros and cons.
Firstly, the issue of sanctity of life will be discussed. It is the view of many religions, the strongest of which is Catholicism, that life is inherently valuable regardless of condition or quality. As is often the case with Christianity, this view has arisen from passages of the bible that, though not specifically speaking on euthanasia, speak of how all life is worthwhile, and that “life is a gift from God”[1], meaning it should never be rejected or taken away, as this is the sole right of God. This is emphasised in Exodus 20:13 of the bible, which reads “you shall not kill” which, though rather general, does clearly state that one should not end another’s life, no matter what the circumstance. This is in fact one of the main strengths of this point of view; it is clear cut, absolutist, and easy for followers to understand. It