One of the principal questions in contemporary medical ethics that bleeds into societal morality is the question of euthanasia. At the very heart of this argument is the perception and attitude about death itself. Indeed, death may or may not be perceived as a disease in and of itself, and may be treated in similar ways, with all the ethical predispositions that are inherent in modern medical behavioral (Callahan 54-6).
Should, for instance, modern medicine do all it can to save a patient, or should quality of life issues enter into the question? What is the moral balance between preserving life and preventing a once vital human from remaining comatose, sometimes for years? Should religious beliefs prevent medical professionals from helping to ease the pain and suffering of prolonged treatment in a terminally ill patient? These are but some of the difficult questions surrounding the debate on the subject of euthanasia. One wonders, then, if the subject should have special treatment, or if the moral wisdom of contemporary society will engender cogent responses to the dilemma (Schneiderman 15-18). This paper will present an overview of the major issues on the subject, give both the pro and con sides of the argument, and conclude with a synthesis of the dilemmas faced by both health professionals and society at large. Throughout the paper, there will be discussions of medical, moral, religious, and legal aspects of euthanasia.
At the basis of the traditional view on euthanasia lies Christian teaching. Christianity teaches that every human was created in the image of God, therefore all human life is sacred and cannot be taken except by God (Rachels 3). However, a variety of variables exist within the issue of life. For instance, capital punishment is traditionally sanctioned, yet mercy killing is considered anathema. There are also issues involved as to killing people or letting them die. The medical ethics involved in...