Euthanasia can be described as a practice of killing or allowing the death of an individual, who is severely sick or injured (Lecture Slides, Week 1). When suffering becomes unbearable to a person their family or themselves turn to euthanasia as the last resort to end the pain. To elaborate, euthanasia is only performed when a patient is diagnosed with an untreatable disease or an irreversible coma. With that being said, euthanasia can only be considered if the patient is in the terminal stage of life and is suffering from intense pain that can no longer be treated. In other words, euthanasia is the ending of someone’s life but with the intention that death is the best choice and will relieve the from any further pain. To some individuals this practice is viewed as another form of murder or suicide regardless of the intention. Thus, although euthanasia does have parts that overlap with suicide, there is a moral difference between murder, suicide, and euthanasia.
There are different kinds of euthanasias; there is voluntary, involuntary and non-voluntary euthanasia. Voluntary euthanasia involves the consent of the patient, whether that is a verbal or written consent. (Lecture, Week 1). Another kind of euthanasia is involuntary euthanasia, which is when the patient does not actively grant consent, hence the act is against their will. The last kind of euthanasia is, non-voluntary, this is where consent cannot be granted. An example would be a person who is in permanent coma or a person who has suffered severe brain damage (Lecture Slides, Week 1). In addition, there is also active and passive euthanasia, where active euthanasia deals with “actively bringing out the death of an individual” (Lecture Slides, Week 1), where as passive deals with “failing to take available measures to prevent…” a person’s death (Lecture Slides, Week 1). Withholding a person from treatment and allowing a person to die, because death is certain, is not the same as murdering a person cold bloodedly, therefore it can be justified that there’s a moral difference between the two.
The different kinds of euthanasia provide different scenarios which prove that there are moral differences between suicide, murder and euthanasia. For instance, some people tie involuntary active euthanasia with murder, but they are actually quite different. Murder can be defined as a premeditated killing of an individual by another individual. To clarify, this means that an individual has decided to think out and/or plan a way to kill a person intentionally. When a person murders another person it is for the “killer’s own good/pleasure” (Lecture Video, Week 1), but with euthanasia it is for the patient’s well being, and there is no malicious intent. Therefore, since euthanasia cannot be defined in the same way, they are considered different. In addition, all the resources and hospital staff that is needed to keep patients, whose death is unquestionable, can be used to treat patients who have curable diseases. Another scenario would be animal owners who put their pets down. They are not labeled as murderers, because it is a difficult decision they have to make. If a person’s dog is on the verge of dying and is continuously suffering, they might have to come to the difficult decision of euthanasia, for the dogs well being. Another example of involuntary euthanasia would be if a soldier has their stomach blown apart by an explosive. Although the soldier might be in excruciating pain, he begs the doctor to save his life, however the doctor knows that no matter what, the soldier will die in a matter of minutes. The doctor does not help the soldier, an example of passive euthanasia, and treats a soldier who has a wound that is actually curable. In this situation the doctor decides that euthanasia is the best choice, and helps another person whose death is not certain. The moral difference between involuntary euthanasia and murder is intentionally killing and letting someone die.
Furthermore, non-voluntary euthanasia is another scenario, and also morally different than murder. An example of this would be, if someone is in a coma or on life support and the doctors have come to the concrete conclusion that there is nothing that can be done for the patient and that they will not recover, then non-voluntary euthanasia seems to be the best option. If there is no guarantee of them ever waking up, then taking the patient off of life support is reasonable, and therefore not murder because it was not planned and once again, there was no malicious intent. One thing to keep in mind is that the term ‘nonvoluntary’ does not mean that the patient opposed, it simply means that they are not competent to make a decision on their own. A family member would only do what is best for them, and they might have to turn to euthanasia.
On the other hand, voluntary euthanasia may overlap with suicide, or assisted suicide because their is consent, but they are still morally different. Suicide can be defined as the ending of someone’s own life due to stress or depression, among many other reasons. Euthanasia is different in the act alone because the patient is not physically doing the killing. A person who commits suicide will most likely commit suicide alone, unlike voluntary euthanasia that is assisted and done professionally. Euthanasia is also the ending of someone’s life because there is no chance of getting better, while suicide on the other hands deals with depression and other illness that have a cure. One way to think about voluntary euthanasia is that it does end both the pain and suffering for patients who are terminally ill and their family members. Furthermore, families of those patients suffer from economic burdens as they deal with medical expenses, something that can be applied to all forms of euthanasia. Most importantly, euthanasia provides individuals with a sense of autonomy, to decide when and how their lives should end, when the outcome of death is certain. As a result, voluntary active euthanasia can induce happiness for people. Firstly, the person suffering will no longer be in pain and at the same time will have control over their lives allowing them to feel pleasure and satisfaction. Additionally, the patient’s family and friends who also feel pain and sadness, and who are economically struggling will ultimately be free of pain as well. Therefore, active voluntary euthanasia would not be the same as suicide because the patient is not commiting the act and the intention is also different.
The moral difference between killing a person (murder), suicide, and letting a person die can be explained through the understanding of all kinds of euthanasias. The intentions and motives are very different for euthanasia than they are in suicide and murder, and therefore are morally different.
2019-5-6-1557123271