Euthanasia
preserve life;
-Greek = “easy death”
-Painless and peaceful death
-“Mercy killing”
-A merciful release from an incurable and
prolonged suffering.
-An individual’s right to die in a painless and
peaceful manner when he/she is confronted
with a horrible disease, and the quality of his/her
life deteriorates.
-“Self-administered” euthanasia
-“Other-administered” euthanasia
• Active (positive) euthanasia -a terminally
ill patient will deliberately, directly
terminate his/her life by employing
painless methods. Voluntary.
• Passive (negative) euthanasia -one
allows self to die without taking any
medicine or by refusing medical
treatment. One simply refuses to take
anything to sustain life.
4 classifications
1. Active and voluntary euthanasia -as
requested by the patient. Active because
some positive means is used to terminate
the patient’s life.
2. Passive and voluntary euthanasia -no
positive method is employed; the patient
is merely permitted to pass away. Done
upon the patient’s request.
3. Active and non-voluntary euthanasia -
physician, spouse, family members,
relative, or friends decide. A positive
method is utilized to terminate person’s
life.
4. Passive and non-voluntary euthanasia -a
patient is allowed to die as requested by
physician, spouse, family members,
relative, or friends. No positive means is
employed to end patient’s life.
The problem with human dignity
The moral issue around euthanasia revolves
around the preservation of human dignity in
death.
Positive side = euthanasia aims to preserve
human dignity until death. Not only does one
have a duty to preserve life but also the duty to
die with dignity (being able to choose).
Negative side = euthanasia erodes human
dignity. Hastens the death of an individual.
Ethical Views on Euthanasia
• Natural Law Ethics = Euthanasia is
morally wrong (T. Gary Williams) it is an
intentional killing and opposes the natural
moral law or the natural inclination to
• Second reason, it can be performed for
purposes of self-interest or other
consequences. A mistaken diagnosis is
always possible, but one may justify such
mistakes through mercy killing once it is
considered a legitimate practice.
• Recovery from a serious illness requires
that one fights for his/her life, so the very
possibility of euthanasia may keep
him/her from doing just that.
• Thirdly, doctors and other healthcare
professionals may be tempted not to do
their best to save the patient. Resorting
to euthanasia as an easy way out and
simply disregard any other alternatives
• James Webster Rachels was an
American philosopher who specialized in
ethics and animal rights.
• Believes that euthanasia is humane, as it
allows suffering to be brought to a
speedy end. Whether killing is right or
wrong, it depends on the motives and
circumstances under which it takes
place.
• If the intensions and situations are of a
certain kind, then active euthanasia can
be deemed morally right.
• Evil intensions render decisions or
actions morally wrong
• If one helps an agonizing medically
hopeless patient to die painlessly, he/she
will be doing the patient a favor since it is
only a matter of time before the patient
dies anyway. It is wrong to prolong the
patient’s suffering needlessly
• Philippa Ruth Foot FBA was an English
philosopher and one of the founders of
contemporary virtue ethics, who was
inspired by the ethics of Aristotle.
• Everyone has a right to life. It is what a
person wants that counts
• Example; if someone would be better off
dead, killing him/her is not justified if
he/she expresses the desire to live.
• Only when a person has decided, after
battling some incurable disease, that life
is no longer worth living that both active
and passive voluntary euthanasia can be
endorsed and regarded as legitimate and
justified.
• Richard Booker Brandt was an American
philosopher working in the utilitarian
tradition in moral philosophy.
• Applies Ross’s notion of prima facie duty
not to injure others in his analysis.
• If instructions have been left for the
patient’s life to be ended painlessly, it
becomes one’s prima facie obligation to
do so. Not to follow such a wish would be
remiss in one’s prima facie obligation to
keep others from further harm or more
pain.
• If no instructions were left whatsoever,
then one may attempt to determine what
the patients wishes would be from what
she/he knows about him as a person.
• The extent to which human life is valued
is referred to as sanctity of life. Humans
were created as part of God's creation
and in God's likeness, according to Jews.
As a result, human life should be
respected and regarded as holy and
provided by God. Only God can give life,
and only God can take it away.
• Euthanasia is contradictory with the
sanctity of life as it interferes with God's
perfect time for death.
PRINCIPLES
• The principle of autonomy is
applicable in euthanasia since
autonomy refers to the right of
individuals to make their own
decisions about their mental health
and health care. We all have the
freedom to make our own choice, but
we need to make sure that we are
aware of the choices we make.
Assuming the person is an adult with
decision-making capacity, autonomy
would support euthanasia.
• The principle of beneficence would
also be applicable in euthanasia if it is
in the case of a terminally ill patient
who is in unbearable pain and wishes
to end his life; it seems that the most
beneficial act would be to end his life
mercifully. In this instance, death is a
sure thing, and the doctor has two
options: let the sickness run its course
or put the patient to sleep. While the
first option accomplishes nothing
other than prolonging the patient's
suffering and allowing him to die in
pain, the second option accomplishes
we doctors beneficent obligation by
acting to help relieve the patient's
pain and make his inevitable death a
little easier.
• The principle of nonmaleficence is to
minimize or do no harm; there would
always be treatments or medications
that would result in an adverse effect,
which is why we need to consider
where would be the best benefit for
the patient. As for euthanasia, it may
apply to the principle of
nonmaleficence since if the patient
wants to prevent prolonging pain and
suffering; the best way would be
through a painless death.
• In the principle of confidentiality,
health care workers should not
disclose any information since the
patient has the right to privacy. In
relation to euthanasia, it is necessary
to observe confidentiality since the
health care workers were entrusted
by the patient to hold in information.
This shows that health professionals
have to obey and respect the patient
and help to preserve the patient’s
dignity even after death.
• The principle of veracity is defined as
being honest and telling the truth,
which means that healthcare workers
should not withhold the whole truth to
the patient. In relation to euthanasia,
the health care workers should
always stay truthful to their patients
 by providing the necessary
information the patient needed to
know in order for the patient be free
from distress.

References
Timbreza, F. (2021). The Moral Issue of
Euthanasia. In F. Timbreza, Bioethics
and Moral Decisions Second Edition (pp.
117-125). Quezon City: C & E Publishing,
Inc.

Sanctity of life - The origin and value of human

life - GCSE Religious Studies Revision - WJEC.
(2021). BBC Bitesize.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/zpx68mn
/revision/1