ETHICAL ANALYSES OF EUTHANASIA

GAY-WILLIAMSHe considers euthanasia as an intentional taking of the life of a suffering patient who cannot recover anymore.

He has three points to prove his disapproval of euthanasia.

FIRST, euthanasia is against the natural law because it violates the natural process of life. Everything that begins has an end. Thus, any practice that goes against the natural processis a violation of it. Euthanasia itself is immoral because it manipulates and violates the naturalprocess.

SECOND, euthanasia is wrong because it is against self-interest. When euthanasia is permitted, severely sick people may automatically resort to committing it. Insteadof looking for an alternative relief, the dying person may not be able to see it anymore.

THIRD, euthanasia is against the physician’s ought. Medical practitioners are committed to saving lives. A life lost is a failure in their part. Thus, committing euthanasia is horrible and compromises the quality of medical care.

PHILIPPA FOOTVoluntary euthanasia is morally legitimate but non-voluntary euthanasia is partly permissible. She supported her arguments with the “right to life” principle. Any form of euthanasia that does not respect the right to life or assumes responsibility over the life of others is not legitimate to be called moral.

Furthermore, we believe that euthanasia is always wrong because it violates the natural law and it disrespects the dignity and sanctity of human life.

As a conclusion, passive euthanasia (stopping or not providing medication) for economic reason and easing physical pain but continuing the palliative

attention (love and care) is not euthanasia at all.