Moral Codes of Society & Euthanasia
Euthanasia occurs whenever a doctor is involved
This is an excerpt from the paper...
Euthanasia occurs whenever a doctor is involved in one way or another in the termination of a patient's life. There are many reasons why euthanasia should not be legalized. One of the strongest arguments against euthanasia is that it goes against the traditional moral codes of society. Since ancient times, all of the major religions have encouraged a respect for human life. According to this viewpoint, life is a divine gift. As such, it is morally wrong for a person to take another person's life for any reason. Proponents of euthanasia claim that there are certain circumstances in which killing may be humane. For example, it is argued that killing a terminally ill patient is merciful because it stops the suffering of that patient. Despite this argument, the strong moral and social prohibitions against killing still exist. These values are reflected in the legal tradition which likewise prohibits the taking of human life under any circumstance. Another argument against legalized euthanasia is seen in the fact that doctors are sworn to save lives rather than end them. Yet another argument holds that the legalization of some forms of euthanasia will lead to other, more dangerous, forms being accepted as well. Most doctors are trained to uphold the Hippocratic Oath. According to the Hippocratic Oath, the doctor's role in society is to save lives and relieve suffering. By contrast, the doctor is expected to not "intervene to lower the health standards of the pati
. . .
oth moral and legal precedents. The opponents of euthanasia believe that the injunction against killing applies in all cases. Thus, "it is an absolute prohibition in the sense that no society can be indifferent about the taking of human life." Respect for human life is an important component in the maintenance of social order. According to Beauchamp and Childress, "there would be a general reduction of respect for human life as a result of the official removal of some barriers to killing."
This leads to the anti-euthanasia perspective that some people call the "slippery slope" argument. According to this argument, society's acceptance of one negative value leads eventually to the acceptance of other values which are even worse. Applied to the euthanasia issue, it is feared that "once society starts down the slippery slope by allowing an exception to the ancient commandment 'Thou shalt not kill,' it becomes harder and harder to stop the slide - it is irresistibly tempting to permit further exceptions." In this regard, the legalization of voluntary and passive euthanasia might lead in turn to society's acceptance of nonvoluntary and active euthanasia. Although arguments have been advanced for voluntary and passive euthanasi
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Beauchamp Childress, According Rachels', Medical Association, , Association AMA, Nazi Germany, Hippocratic Oath, World War, James Rachels, Daniel Jussim, terminally ill, passive euthanasia, human life, legalized euthanasia, slippery slope, active euthanasia, forms euthanasia, medical profession, ill patients, respect human life, euthanasia lead, terminally ill patient, terminally ill patients, voluntary passive euthanasia, slippery slope argument,
Approximate Word count = 1709
Approximate Pages = 7 (250 words per page)
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
