Course Project Milestone - Final Paper

1

EUTHANASIA

Euthanasia

November 22, 2020

Introduction

Euthanasia is defined as the deliberate progress of a person's death for the goodwill of a person. In many cases, euthanasia is executed because of a person's choice; he/she requests dying. However, there are numerous instances when individuals cannot give such a request. An individual undergoing euthanasia is, in most cases, recorded as terminally sick. Euthanasia is conducted by administering deadly injections or failing to conduct activities that have maintained the person alive.

Debate on Euthanasia

The debate concerning euthanasia has raised distinguished opinions. Those supporting the act raise arguments such as it helps in clearing the beds of the hospitals and the resources, it helps end the patient's life since they are terminally sick, and helps relieve the patients from prolonged pain. Additionally, supporters claim that euthanasia is a legalized choice and helps the family members from experiencing continued agony of seeing their beloved's health deteriorate beyond identification. The opposes developing arguments such as the demand for hospital beds by others are not suitable for subjecting others to death. Even when the patient is terminally sick, the doctors can establish a cure for the illness they are facing; suffering is an essential part of human life. The right of choice for euthanasia is not entirely accepted in the authorized systems. Besides, the families have no freedom to decide or pressure a person to end their lives because they fear watching their health deteriorate. Besides, the hospitals have numerous people with distinguished diseases and go searching for treatment of the disease in the hospitals.

Ethical Egoist stands on euthanasia.

Ethical egoism believes that a person should always go according to their interests (Österberg, 2013). Morals egotism keeps reminding people that the interest of an individual is a virtue. Moral egoists do not believe that one could act based on the other person's interests; they believe that one should act based on their interests. Different ethics egoists would develop different arguments and lines of support based on their distinguished opinions on euthanasia regarding euthanasia. For the ethics egoist who is interested in ending the lives of patients, they would support euthanasia compared to those valuing human life who would oppose euthanasia. When supporting their side of the support, the distinguished individuals would generate arguments of their distinguished interest and opinions based on human life. Different people have different opinions about something.

Loyalty to self and loyalty to the community collides in the debate on euthanasia. Loyalty to self implies that one should not lie to themselves; one should not place their needs asides and project others' needs. Additionally, one should not run away or ignore their issues. Concerning euthanasia, one should always value their interest more than those of others. Thus people should not conduct euthanasia for them to remain loyal to themselves.

On the other hand, loyalty to the community indicates that people should always act in ways that are supported and accepted by the community. For instance, many communities are against the act of euthanasia, and thus an individual should not execute the euthanasia for him/her to be loyal to the community. Euthanasia is inhuman and goes against loyalty to self and loyalty to the community and should not be legalized. The best action is to declare euthanasia and illegal.

Social Contract theory on euthanasia

Social contract theorists would rebel against euthanasia since they believe that society exists due to a collection of agreements that govern the people. The rules include the principle of harm that prevents people from assaulting people who are seen as victimized: authorized ethics, benefits of others, and offense principles (Ercke, 2009). The collection of all the principles is against euthanasia since they victimize people and harm people in society.

For the topic selected on euthanasia, there is a collision of personal obligation and national obligation. In personal obligation, individuals are expected to respect and protect the rights of humans. The individuals are expected to protect and respect the patients' rights; the patients have the right to live. The national obligations indicate that people should respects, protect, and fulfill health needs. Therefore, it is essential to withhold respect, protect and fulfill personal rights, and avoid subjecting the individuals to euthanasia. The best course of action is protecting, respecting, and fulfilling personal interests. All individuals need to respect and protect the rights of others and stop euthanasia. Execution of euthanasia is against human rights and should not be legalized; people should be given the freedom to live even when terminally sick. Euthanasia should not be legalized, and the distinguished countries should develop policies to enhance the act's restriction.

American Medical Association

American Medical association fights against euthanasia. The organization develops arguments that the legalization of euthanasia would generate more danger than good (Leikin, 2003). Euthanasia is unsuitable with the role of physicians in being a healer. Legalizing euthanasia in a country would be challenging when controlling, thus posing a severe risk in society. They argue that euthanasia would be executed to patients who are incompetent and other populations who are at risk. When physicians are involved in the act, it increases the margin of the importance of moral prohibition. The association requests the physicians to aggressively perform their duties of responding to the patients' needs rather than taking part in euthanasia.

Conclusion.

Euthanasia is the act of deliberately ending the life of patients. Numerous debates have risen globally, some supporting and others resisting the legalization of the act. Ethics egoists believe that people should respect their interests and should always work towards promoting their interests. Social contract theorist believes that people should have set rules that would enhance the protection of risk of harm to the risky population. The two groups rebel against involvement in euthanasia. Euthanasia needs to be declared illegal since it disrespects human freedom of life, personal interest, community, and God.

References

Ercke, S. (2009). Classical Social Contract Theory The Classical Social Contract Theories of Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau Compared. München: GRIN Verlag GmbH. Leikin, J. B. (2003). American Medical Association: Complete Encyclopedia. New York: Crown Publishers. Österberg, J. (2013). Self and Others : a Study of Ethical Egoism . Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.