Uthinasia - Ethical Views on the Issue

1705 Words7 Pages
Euthanasia is a controversial topic in today's media. It can be defined as the act of putting an end to someone’s unbearable suffering by terminating his or her life (Fatemi, 2007). In a recent article written by AP in the New Zealand Herald, a fifty-seven year old man requests that a doctor be allowed to give him a lethal injection in order to end his life. A question raised to many people is why does this man want to take his life? The short answer is, he is severely disabled and believes his life is not worth living anymore. In 2005 a paralysing stroke left Tony Nicklinson with no movement below the neck and unable to speak. In the article Tony states “I am fed up with my life and don’t want to spend the next twenty years or so like this”. Since 2007, Tony has refused to take heart medication and blood thinners suggested by doctors to lengthen his life. Thus proving, to Tony his life is unworthy of living. Tony wants to change the law to allow his doctor to kill him by lethal injection without getting any kind of charges. The only other course of action Tony could possibly take would be to kill himself, which in his paralysed state he cannot do without assistance. There are many issues surrounding Tony’s circumstances however the biggest issue is the question, should we as humans be able to choose when to die? With two different ethical theories, we can understand the article whilst also comparing the pros and cons of euthanasia. Kantian ethics go against the idea that humans have the right to decide when they want to die. According to Kantian Ethics, the value of life is most important and all of our duties are created from one ultimate principle ‘The Categorical Imperative’ (James Rachels, 2010). Meaning that whatever rule made in any circumstance must become a universal law and become lawfully right in every situation (Lafollette, 2006). Thus implying that if
Open Document