Euthanasia: the future or tragedy of the society?

What is Euthanasia?

Euthanasia is the termination of a very sick person's life in order to relieve them of their suffering.

A person who undergoes euthanasia usually has an incurable condition. But there are other instances where some people want their life to be ended.

In many cases, it is carried out at the person's request but there are times when they may be too ill and the decision is made by relatives, medics or, in some instances, the courts.

The term is derived from the Greek word euthanatos which means easy death.

Euthanasia is against the law in the UK where it is illegal to help anyone kill themselves. Voluntary euthanasia or assisted suicide can lead to imprisonment of up to 14 years.

The issue has been at the center of very heated debates for many years and is surrounded by religious, ethical and practical considerations.

Mercy killing

Very often people call euthanasia 'mercy killing', perhaps thinking of it for someone who is terminally ill and suffering prolonged, unbearable pain.

Why people want euthanasia

Most people think unbearable pain is the main reason people seek euthanasia, but some surveys in the USA and the Netherlands showed that less than a third of requests for euthanasia were because of severe pain.

Terminally ill people can have their quality of life severely damaged by physical conditions such as incontinence, nausea and vomiting, breathlessness, paralysis and difficulty in swallowing.

Psychological factors that cause people to think of euthanasia include depression, fearing loss of control or dignity, feeling a burden, or dislike of being dependent.

Why euthanasia should be allowed

Those in favour of euthanasia argue that a civilised society should allow people to die in dignity and without pain, and should allow others to help them do so if they cannot manage it on their own.

They say that our bodies are our own, and we should be allowed to do what we want with them. So it's wrong to make anyone live longer than they want. In fact making people go on living when they don't want to violates their personal freedom and human rights. It's immoral, they say to force people to continue living in suffering and pain.

They add that as suicide is not a crime, euthanasia should not be a crime.

Types of  euthanasia

Active and passive euthanasia

Active euthanasia

Active euthanasia occurs when the medical professionals, or another person, deliberately do something that causes the patient to die.

Passive euthanasia

Passive euthanasia occurs when the patient dies because the medical professionals either don't do something necessary to keep the patient alive, or when they stop doing something that is keeping the patient alive.

• switch off life-support machines
• disconnect a feeding tube
• don't carry out a life-extending operation
• don't give life-extending drugs

The moral difference between killing and letting die

Many people make a moral distinction between active and passive euthanasia.

They think that it is acceptable to withhold treatment and allow a patient to die, but that it is never acceptable to kill a patient by a deliberate act.

Some medical people like this idea. They think it allows them to provide a patient with the death they want without having to deal with the difficult moral problems they would face if they deliberately killed that person.

Overview of arguments against euthanasia

It's possible to argue about the way we've divided up the arguments, and many arguments could fall into more categories than we've used.

Ethical arguments

• Euthanasia weakens society's respect for the sanctity of life
• Accepting euthanasia accepts that some lives (those of the disabled or sick) are worth less than others
• Voluntary euthanasia is the start of a slippery slope that leads to involuntary euthanasia and the killing -of people who are thought undesirable
• Euthanasia might not be in a person's best interests
• Euthanasia affects other people’s rights, not just those of the patient

Practical arguments

• Proper palliative care makes euthanasia unnecessary
• There's no way of properly regulating euthanasia
• Allowing euthanasia will lead to less good care for the terminally ill
• Allowing euthanasia undermines the committment of doctors and nurses to saving lives
• Euthanasia may become a cost-effective way to treat the terminally ill
• Allowing euthanasia will discourage the search for new cures and treatments for the terminally ill
• Euthanasia undermines the motivation to provide good care for the dying, and good pain relief
• Euthanasia gives too much power to doctors
• Euthanasia exposes vulnerable people to pressure to end their lives
• Moral pressure on elderly relatives by selfish families
• Moral pressure to free up medical resources
• Patients who are abandoned by their families may feel euthanasia is the only solution

Against the will of God

Religious people don't argue that we can't kill ourselves, or get others to do it. They know that we can do it because God has given us free will. Their argument is that it would be wrong for us to do so.

They believe that every human being is the creation of God, and that this imposes certain limits on us. Our lives are not only our lives for us to do with as we see fit.

To kill oneself, or to get someone else to do it for us, is to deny God, and to deny God's rights over our lives and his right to choose the length of our lives and the way our lives end.

The nature of suffering

Christianity teaches that suffering can have a place in God's plan, in that it allows the sufferer to share in Christ's agony and his redeeming sacrifice. They believe that Christ will be present to share in the suffering of the believer.

Overview of arguments in favour of euthanasia

Arguments in favour of euthanasia can be broken down into a few main categories:

Arguments based on rights

• People have an explicit right to die
• A separate right to die is not necessary, because our other human rights imply the right to die
• Death is a private matter and if there is no harm to others, the state and other people have no right to interfere (a libertarian argument)

Practical arguments

• It is possible to regulate euthanasia
• Death is a private matter and if there is no harm to others, the state and other people have no right to interfere (a libertarian argument)
• Allowing people to die may free up scarce health resources (this is a possible argument, but no authority has seriously proposed it)
• Euthanasia happens anyway (a utilitarian or consequentialist argument)

Regulating euthanasia

Those in favour of euthanasia think that there is no reason why euthanasia can't be controlled by proper regulation, but they acknowledge that some problems will remain.

For example, it will be difficult to deal with people who want to implement euthanasia for selfish reasons or pressurise vulnerable patients into dying.

This is little different from the position with any crime. The law prohibits theft, but that doesn't stop bad people stealing things.

The right not to be killed

The right to life gives a person the right not to be killed if they don't want to be.

Those in favour of euthanasia will argue that respect for this right not to be killed is sufficient to protect against misuse of euthanasia, as any doctor who kills a patient who doesn't want to die has violated that person's rights.

Opponents of euthanasia may disagree, and argue that allowing euthanasia will greatly increase the risk of people who want to live being killed. The danger of violating the right to life is so great that we should ban euthanasia even if it means violating the right to die.

Religion and euthanasia

Religions and death

Death is one of the most important things that religions deal with.

All faiths offer meaning and explanations for death and dying; all faiths try to find a place for death and dying within human experience.

For those left behind when someone dies religions provide rituals to mark death, and ceremonies to remember those who have died.

Religions provide understanding and comfort for those who are facing death.

Religions regard understanding death and dying as vital to finding meaning in human life. Dying is often seen as an occasion for getting powerful spiritual insights as well as for preparing for whatever afterlife may be to come.

So it's not surprising that all faiths have strong views on euthanasia.

General Christian view

Christians are mostly against euthanasia. The arguments are usually based on the beliefs that life is given by God, and that human beings are made in God's image. Some churches also emphasise the importance of not interfering with the natural process of death.

Life is a gift from God

• all life is God-given
• birth and death are part of the life processes which God has created, so we should respect them
• therefore no human being has the authority to take the life of any innocent person, even if that person wants to die

Human beings are valuable because they are made in God's image

• human life possesses an intrinsic dignity and value because it is created by God in his own image for the distinctive destiny of sharing in God's own life
• saying that God created humankind in his own image doesn't mean that people actually look like God, but that people have a unique capacity for rational existence that enables them to see what is good and to want what is good
• as people develop these abilities they live a life that is as close as possible to God's life of love
• this is a good thing, and life should be preserved so that people can go on doing this
• to propose euthanasia for an individual is to judge that the current life of that individual is not worthwhile
• such a judgement is incompatible with recognising the worth and dignity of the person to be killed
• therefore arguements based on the quality of life are completely irrelevant
• nor should anyone ask for euthanasia for themselves because no-one has the right to value anyone, even themselves, as worthless