An analysis of the morality of euthanasia
It therefore may be objected that either life is sacred, or it is not, and if it is not then we may end up in a situation we find utterly morally indefensible even if we start from apparently moral motivations. Here, we bypass theories about autonomy of the will from the John Stuart Mill and Immanuel Kant, although some authors believe that the right to self-determination derives only from the teaching of Kant 2.
This is contrary to the highest duty we have towards ourselves, for it annuls the condition of all other duties; it goes beyond the limits of the use of free will, for this use is possible only through the existence of the Subject. Sullivan, The first condition lies in the absence of any external pressure on the person exercising this right.
It might be thought plausible that a person with a severe and worsening disease who is not euthanised could have their condition and pain carefully managed by skilled healthcare professionals so as to greatly diminish any suffering.
Is euthanasia morally acceptable
No legislator, guided by moral ideals, can ever morally recommend this type of killing, whether motivated by a mistaken sense of mercy or not. How dreadful everyone would find them. Introduction When a patient is in immense amounts of pain from a terminal illness, one of the options to relieve a person from the pain is euthanasia. However, there is no unanimous consent that the right to die exists that it can be derived from other rights such as from the right to life , and the right to die argument can also be used as an objection to euthanasia, in that this right does not exist. But instances of suicide of great heroism exist. Passive Euthanasia 8Passive euthanasia occurs when a person is allowed to die due to the deliberate withdrawal of treatment that might keep them alive. What are they? The libertarian approach would postulate the suspension of laws banning euthanasia. So he killed himself.However this deduction, using a specific concept of privacy which also encompasses the right to die as the private issue under the presupposition that death is inherently a private issue is more debatable than the deduction of the right to die from the right to life.
Imprudence, which does not imply a desire to cease to live, must, therefore, be distinguished from the intention to murder oneself.