Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Ethical dilemma with euthanasia
Ethical dilemma with euthanasia
Ethical dilemma with euthanasia
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Ethical dilemma with euthanasia
In discussions of euthanasia, a controversial issue has been whether euthanasia is morally wrong or not. Many people, the U.S. Government included, believe that euthanasia is not permissible when it is considered active. According to Warren’s view, however, euthanasia may not be morally wrong in some cases. Therefore, they disagree on whether euthanasia is morally permissible or not. In this paper, I will use Warren’s view on moral personhood to see what her verdict of euthanasia and assisted suicide might be. After that, I will use real life cases to see what Warren’s verdict is in a real life situation of euthanasia. Finally, I will raise two possible objections to her view. In Warren’s “On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion,” she argues against the anti-abortionists argument. The anti-abortionist argument goes as follows: It is wrong to kill innocent human beings. Fetuses are innocent human beings. Therefore, it is wrong to kill …show more content…
She states that there is a significant difference between being genetically human and being a person who belongs to the moral community. From there, she goes on to say that being biologically human is not sufficient to be considered a person. It is only by belonging to the moral community that a human may be considered a person. After that, Warren lays out specific criteria that must be met to be a member of the moral community. The five criteria that must be met are: consciousness (and the capacity to feel pain), reasoning, self motivated activity, capacity to communicate, and the presence of self concepts and self awareness (55). Failure to meet any of the criteria, especially the first two, results in exclusion from the moral community. Once excluded from the moral community, Warren sees no wrong in that human being
...es presented, and disregarded the fetuses right to a valuable life. Warren also briefly discussed the morally permissible options, such as adoption but failed to include how much more beneficiary putting a child up for adoption is rather than aborting the fetus. Marquis article is more convincing even to those who are pro-choice as it is less easy to criticize.
To speak plainly, the issue of abortion is a slippery slope of morality. While siding with the Pro-Choice side myself, it felt necessary to examine Warren’s opinion so as to give constructive criticism and potentially help strengthen her argument for the future. Through Warren’s lack of sound consideration for what constitutes a personhood and numerous issues regarding potential personhood, it is clear that the conversation still has a long way to go.
Both Thomson and Warren have permissive views on the abortion. Thomson claims that the abortion is morally permissible in a very early stage of the pregnancy because an unborn fetus is not a person early on the pregnancy. Especially, in the case of pregnant due to rape, she is inclined to allow the abortion. According to Warren, she insists that the abortion is permissible if an unwanted or defective infant is born into a society that cannot afford to raise a child (Timmons, 2014, p. 437). She states that a woman’s rights to freedom, happiness, and self-determination are violated due to an unwanted pregnancy (Timmons, 2014, p. 441).
Mary Anne Warren’s “On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion” describes her justification that abortion is not a fundamentally wrong action for a mother to undertake. By forming a distinction between being genetically human and being a fully developed “person” and member of the “moral community” that encompasses humanity, Warren argues that it must be proven that fetuses are human beings in the morally relevant sense in order for their termination to be considered morally wrong. Warren’s rationale of defining moral personhood as showcasing a combination of five qualities such as “consciousness, reasoning, self-motivated activity, capacity of communication, and self-awareness” forms the basis of her argument that a fetus displays none of these elements that would justify its classification as a person and member of the morally relevant community (Timmons 386).
Should euthanasia be allowed or not? It has become a very controversial issue nowadays. Velleman and Hooker have different perspectives on euthanasia, and whether there should be laws permitting voluntary and non-voluntary euthanasia. Although there are well-reasoned arguments on both sides, I would strongly agree with Hooker's argument that there should be a law permitting voluntary euthanasia when it is for the wellbeing of the person and that each individual should be able to make their own decision.
I picked voluntary euthanasia as my written assignment topic this week because while reading through it, my mother’s comment of that she wants to just pass away quickly, rather suffering slowly and be a burden to everyone around here a long time ago came to my mind. She made that comment after visiting someone dying from cancer, so I understand why she made that remark. The reasons cited for voluntary euthanasia is to end the suffering and stop being a burden to everyone around you and is asking for health professionals to assist in ending your life (Young, 2014). Not many countries as we learned has legalized euthanasia, but a few like the Netherlands has set 5 very strict conditions for asking for voluntary euthanasia which are: “suffering
In today’s modern society the use of euthanasia and assisted suicide is a hot button topic. Due to the argumentative nature of this issue many philosophers have created their own ideas on how euthanasia and assisted suicide benefit or harm society. These philosophers such as Brock and Callahan differ in their arguments about euthanasia and assisted suicide. Like almost all the heavily opinionated topics in society there should be limits to the use thus my consensus regarding euthanasia and assisted suicide is that it should be legalized to a certain extent.
Controversy around physician assisted suicide partially comes from the lack of knowledge surrounding it. Euthanasia, also known as voluntary active euthanasia is where the physician intentionally ends the patient’s life at the patient’s request and with their full informed consent (Emanuel, 2015). Nowhere in the United States is this legal. Passive euthanasia is when life-sustaining treatments are terminated such as respirators and artificial nutrition (Emanuel, 2015). Palliative sedation is considered ethical and involves administering drugs that pose a risk of death (Emanuel, 2015). There are numerous terms used to describe death and physician’s involvement so it is important to distinguish between the different terms to better educate patients.
Death is something almost everyone fears, but the people that aren’t afraid are the ones suffering from terminal disease and other life-threatening illness. Euthanasia and physician assisted suicide are very serious topics in the medical community, as supporters to legalization argue that it’s the right of the person to live or die, while on the other side opponents argue legalizing it me1ans that doctors will have the ability to kill patients and that the government approves it. Euthanasia is legal in multiple countries including Netherlands, Switzerland, and Canada. Physician assisted suicide is legal in a lot of countries including; Germany, Japan, and Switzerland. Euthanasia is widely conversed in the world and has been since it was first
Abortion is a widely arguable issue that begs the question whether a mother has the right to abort her child or if the child has the right to life. Abortion is the deliberate removal of a fetus from the womb of the mother, resulting in the death of the child. Abortions are said to be morally permissible after a certain number of months after the mother is pregnant because of the development of the embryo to have a brain. The other side of the argument is that right when the mother is pregnant, it is wrong for the mother to abort because the embryo has a right to life as soon as the mother is pregnant. This is a primary concern for anti-abortion supporters. Mary Warren takes this pro-life stance to defend the life of the fetus by not allowing abortions under any circumstance in her case, “On the Moral and legal status of Abortion”, 1973. Warren argues whether abortion is morally permissible at any stage of pregnancy and under any circumstances. Warren’s argument for her stance on abortion is stated as 1) It is wrong to kill human beings. 2) Fetuses are innocent human beings. 3) Therefore it is wrong to kill fetuses. She claims that the credit for her argument lies in the definition of the term ‘human being’. The definition of human is a member of the biological species Homo Sapien. This includes adults, children, and also fetuses that are unborn in the mother’s womb. This is the argument for why abortion is not morally permissible in any case because fetuses are innocent human beings with an inherent right to life as a biological organism. Along with a moral sense of community, human is being a member of the moral community o...
This case would be like the case of the mother who wasn’t financially or emotionally ready. The future burden of this child on the mother’s life constitutes an abortion. Most antiabortionists can agree in some respect that in the case of a rape, a mother can abort the fetus. But if “all persons have a right to life, but that some have less of a right to life than others…that those who came into existence because of rape” must have less (Thomson 71). This sounds quite malice. Who decides what life is more or less important if these fetuses truly are persons? Philosopher Mary Anne Warren states that there are five traits that constitute personhood. These five concepts include consciousness, reasoning, self-motivated activity, the capacity to communicate, and the presence of self-concepts and self-awareness. A fetus that doesn’t even have a developed braid or body cannot fit into these categories. Warren also states that if 1 through 5 are correct, then genetic humanity is not necessary in establishing that something is a person. She believes that some humans are not persons and that non-humans can be considered persons. I do not agree that nonpersons can be humans, but I understand where she is coming
According to the information from Sheri Fink’s New York Times article, in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the Memorial Medical Center was running low on resources with care administered by exhausted doctors and nurses. In the sustained process of waiting for help and evacuations, Anna Pou, Ewing Cook, and the other doctors at the Memorial Medical Center made the controversial decision to inject several patients with drugs, which, at extraordinary high doses, are known to lead to death. In this situation, the patients who were in question were those who doctors designated as very ill and had the lowest chance for survival. While we have examined many hypothetical thought experiments to delve deeper in the discussion of end-of-life ethics,
In her essay, On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion, Mary Anne Warren argues that abortion is always permissible and invades the conservative argument that is based on a vague use of the term human being arguing that the word has both a biological and moral sense. What is important in this article is her argument of the moral sense, which assumes that the unborn do not possess particular characteristics such as consciousness and reasoning and therefore are not human beings. Under the presumption that a fetus is a human being in the moral sense, the traditional argument of (1) it is wrong to kill innocent human beings, and (2) fetuses are innocent human beings, then (3) it is wrong to kill fetuses, ensues. Warren argues that if both of the senses of human beings are implied, as in a moral sense and a biological sense, one of the premises becomes
She begins by stating her own opinion that “the basis of this conviction… is the realization that a fetus is not a person, and thus does not have a full-fledged right to life.” She then goes on to point out that Noonan never questions the assumption if a fetus is human then abortion is wrong for exactly the same reason murder is wrong. Which is very odd considering that the majority of anti-abortionists hold so much weight to their arguments on the fact that abortion is murder to a fetus which they see as being a human being from conception. She calls into question Noonan’s stance again by bringing up the fact a fetus cannot be considered a member of the moral community, those existing with full and equal moral rights, for the basic reason it is not a person, and it is personhood, and not humanity given by the human genetic code as defined by Noonan, which is the basis for membership in this community. Noonan argues a fetus, in any stage of development, satisfies none of the criteria of personhood, and is not even enough like a person to be granted even some of the same rights due to this resemblance. A fetus’s possible personhood is not a threat to the morality of abortion, because whatever the rights of potential people may be, they are always disallowed in any conflict with the moral rights of actual people. Then, Warren declares Noonan needs to
There are actions that we do in today’s society that is similar to euthanasia but is legal. For example, women terminate pregnancies in the womb for neurodegenerative diseases, malformations or defects, and effects that wouldn’t classify as a normal fetus. In Belgium, they discuss active euthanasia for fetuses diagnosed with severe epidermolysis bullosa to Down syndrome or spinal bifida (Hanson, 2015). Active euthanasia is agreed by physicians and both parents before performed. The Groningen protocol was created for children and infants with a hopeless prognosis and will encounter unbearable suffering. Pediatric euthanasia for spina bifida with comorbidities actually decreased from an estimated 15 cases annually to zero, mostly due to rises in the use of structural ultrasound examination at 20 weeks and increased terminations of pregnancies where spina bifida was distinguished (Hanson, 2015). Palliative care aims for healing for the remainder of medicine treatments and care for