Foot euthanasia

In a very few cases, there was no consultation with relatives, though in those cases there were consultations with other medical personnel. She feels that euthanasia will be, first of all, abused. Foot euthanasia problem with legalizing euthanasia would be that people could be too easily persuaded.

Advocates of voluntary euthanasia typically contend that if a person is suffering from a terminal illness; is unlikely to benefit from the discovery of a cure for that illness during Foot euthanasia remains of her life expectancy; is, as a direct result of the illness, either suffering intolerable pain, or only has available a life that is unacceptably burdensome e.

Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia, Peterborough: Restricting access to legalized medical assistance to those whose suffering is less likely to be disputed avoids becoming embroiled in needless controversy. Opponents of voluntary euthanasia have endeavored in a variety of ways to counter the very straightforward moral case that has been laid out above for its legalization see, for example, Keown ; Foley, et al.

The value or, as some would prefer, the right of self-determination does not entitle a patient to try to compel a medical professional to act contrary to her own moral or professional values. At other times, it is understood, more strictly, as damage that has been wrongfully inflicted.

For further discussion see, e.

Analysis of Philippa Foot’s Article on Euthanasia

Because my agency is that of diverting a sequence, not starting one. Certainly, the ancient Greeks and Romans did not believe that life needed to be preserved at any cost and were, in consequence, tolerant of suicide in cases when no relief could be offered to the dying or, in the case of the Stoics and Epicureans, when a person no longer cared for his life.

Finally, it has been argued by some that there may, in reality, be more danger of the line between voluntary and non-voluntary euthanasia being blurred if euthanasia is practised in the absence of legal recognition, since there will, in those circumstances, be no transparency or monitoring.

These studies were carried out in, and respectively see, e. Indeed, the fact that suicide and attempted suicide are no longer criminal offences in many jurisdictions indicates that the central importance of individual self-determination in a closely analogous context has been accepted.

Notwithstanding this response, at least some will wish to question why medical assistance with dying should be restricted to those covered by, in particular, the first three conditions set out above in section 2. The reason for claiming only that this is morally permissible rather than morally obligatory will be explained in the following paragraph.

Consider the case of a patient suffering from motor neurone disease who is completely respirator dependent, finds her condition intolerable, and competently and persistently requests to be removed from the respirator so that she may die.

People have an interest in making important decisions about their lives in accordance with their own conception of how they want to live. Luxembourg followed suit in Evidence that will be introduced below shows that this happens frequently in jurisdictions in which medically assisted dying has been legalized.

Why should those who support the legalization of voluntary euthanasia, because they value the autonomy of the individual, find it psychologically easier, in consequence, to endorse the killing of those who are not able competently to request assistance with dying?

What kills the patient is the act of starving her to death. If a competent person discusses the issue with others on different occasions over time and remains steady in her resolve, or reflects on the issue for an extended period and does not waver in her conviction, her wish to die surely must be counted as enduring.

This is where another crucial point comes into play. Darton, Longman and Todd.

Voluntary Euthanasia

If someone saw a child drowning in a bath it would seem just as bad to let it drown as to push its head under water. Philippa Foot versus James Rachels Philippa Foot, in her article "Euthanasia", takes issue with the argument that Rachels offers in support of the claim that the actions of killing someone and of letting someone die are, in themselves, morally equivalent.

It might be very easy to think about themselves and how raising this child would perhaps be a burden to them or a burden to society. But we can go further. As with other decisions affecting matters of importance, competent adults are presumed to choose voluntarily unless the presence of defeating considerations can be established.

Many skilled palliative care specialists acknowledge that palliative care does not enable an easeful death for every patient. There will be yet others who consider this condition to be too restrictive because competent patients can always refuse nutrition and hydration.

After all, while competent patients are entitled to refuse any form of medical treatment, they are not entitled to insist on the administration of forms of medical treatment that have no prospect of conferring a medical benefit or are not provided for reasons to do with affordability.

This is counter to the view of most physicians.

For these reasons the researchers maintain that non-voluntary euthanasia is not widely practised in The Netherlands. But if you find it meaningful and helpful and would like to contribute whatever easily affordable amount you feel it is worth, please do do.

It has to be agreed that a person in those circumstances who wants to die should not be assumed to have a competent, enduring and truly voluntary desire to die.PHILIPPA FOOT Euthanasia The widely used Shorter Oxford English Dictionary gives three mean- ings for the word "euthanasia": the first, "a quiet and easy death"; the second, "the means of procuring this"; and the third, "the action of inducing a quiet and easy death." It is a curious fact that no one of the.

Analysis of Philippa Foot's Article on Euthanasia Essay Words May 18th, 6 Pages Euthanasia as defined by the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary is a quiet and easy death. Read this Philosophy Research Paper and over 88, other research documents. Analysis of Philippa Foot’s Article on Euthanasia.

Euthanasia as defined by the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary is a quiet and easy death. One may wonder, is there 4/4(2). Foot defines euthanasia as "a matter of opting for death for the good of the one who is to die." (Foot, p.

) I agree with Foot's definition of euthanasia more so than the dictionaries because in her definition she mentions that it's for the good of the person who is to. Consider Foot's example of where active euthanasia would be wrong but passive euthanasia would be right: "Suppose, for example, that a retreating army has to leave behind wounded or exhausted soldiers in the wastes of an arid or snowbound land where the only prospect is death by starvation or at the hands of an enemy notoriously cruel.

It is sometimes said that if society allows voluntary euthanasia to be legalized, we will then have set foot on a slippery slope that will lead us eventually to support other forms of euthanasia, including, in particular, non-voluntary euthanasia.

Whereas it was once the common refrain that that was precisely what happened in Hitler's Germany.

Foot euthanasia
Rated 3/5 based on 36 review