The Spanish movie “Mar adentro” (The Sea inside) brought me to think of the long discussed subject of Euthanasia. It is about a man (Ramón) who suffered an accident which left him living the rest of his life on his bed, at the care of his family members. He wants the person who truly loves him to help him terminate his life with dignity.
I think this is a morally hard case viewed from two perspectives. That from Ramon’s side, who is incapable of doing anything and wants to commit suicide, but even harder to look at from his friend’s side who shall help him do it. Then, you can also look at it from the perspective of the people who he leaves behind. What about their suffering? And whose is greater?
The first reason to describe this as morally wrong is because it would be breaking the law. Helping someone kill himself is considered murder in most places. This would mean she is breaking a public law, and obstructing negative rights. Viewed from his perspective, in some countries, like India for example, suicide is a punishable crime which you go to jail for. But what about this man’s desire to stop suffering and being a financial burden on his family. All he can do is lie in bed relying on people to take care of him, hence, only decreasing their welfare, but staying alive for the sake of morality. What about his basic rights to freedom of choice? Who should really be making this moral judgment? The government? Or the person who has been lying in a bed for over 30 years not being able to do anything.
The fact that the government makes it illegal would mean he would have to do something morally wrong (kill himself) to fulfill his need/and wants. This would be morally wrong. But if it were not illegal, would this be morally wrong? And is it morally wrong to just let this person suffer in bed?
s690159
3 comments:
From the right-based theory it can be viewed that an invidual has the right to an adequate standard of living. It is a right that an individual can make upon others or society. If staying alive is unbearable for Ramon I think it is morally permissible to let him take his own future in hand. Of course he must carefully take the decision and there must be some guidance with this, making sure that this is really what he wants. Furthermore, if the government would make the choice to forbid him from terminating his life, this will violate Ramon's right from freedom of choice. So from the right-based perspective I think it should be morally permissible for Ramon to terminate his life with dignity.
I have an argument for euthanasia. If a very sick person comes to the point that he is suffering very badly, because he has an incurable disease and he is diagnosed to die anyway, death is in the persons best (self) interest. In this case, euthanasia is morally acceptable only if some conditions are met. The suicide, performed with assistance, must not violate the rights of others (excluding the sick person). The decision and the act must be performed by adults who made this decision in consensus and are competent to do so.
ANR: 536273
I think, it is morally wrong to help people end their lifes. In our western society, alot of people want suicide because of the pressure and anxity. Why are we than want to prevent that happening? Why should we not just let these people suicide. Because we as human have the duty to help people continue with life. In this case, the Ramon is definitely stressed. We should help him cure his mental illness, in stead of helping him killing himself. So it is morally wrong to use euthanasia.
Post a Comment