CRITICAL THINKING ON EUTHANASIA

ANKIT JAJOO 1011608 III - BBA - B

CASE ON DIANNE PRETTY

Diannne Pretty
Dianne Pretty was suffering from motor neurone disease and wanted to die. She and her husband petitioned the courts to give immunity from prosecution to her husband if he were to help her to kill herself. He did not get immunity, the disease took its inevitable course, and Dianne Pretty died in hospital under exactly the sort of conditions she had wanted to avoid. A documentary crew recorded the suffering and loss of dignity that Dianne Pretty endured, and this made her case very well known in England. The court cases, show an interesting range of ethical responses, ending with the statement from the European Courts only weeks before she died that Dianne Pretty did not have the right to die. The deontological argument about the 'right to die' is not the only position to come out of the courts. An earlier statement said that, though in Dianne Pretty's case her horrific suffering would justify assisting her suicide, to change the law would lead to more harm than good. In other words, a rule utilitarian response was chosen, even though an act utilitarian would disagree.

EXPLANATION OF THE CASE THROUGH THE FOUR CASES:

The Role Exchange Tests: We try to see the situation from there point of view. If we see the situation of DIANNEs point of view than we will feel pity and would be in favour of euthanasia. No one of us would ever like to be in her situation where we are only breathing. If we follow the role exchange theory then it is very clear that everyone will be in favour of euthanasia because none of us would like to live a life wherein we would be deplead of our expression, we cant move, we cant speak, we cant express anything. Its a terrible thing even if we think of being in her situation.

The universal consequences theory: This test focuses on general consequences of our action that we might take. In this we imagine what would happen if everyone in a situation to ours would take up this action. What would be the results if the entire society follow my action. According to this theory I dont seem to accept euthanasia because it will only lead to people filing in petition everyday-everytime. They will lose the power to resist any sufferings. We will be seeing people only filing petition for mercy killing. It will only be an alternative wherein people will be switching to only because they cant bear the situation. I think we should accept all the challenges be it anything rather than appealing for suicide. It should not be legalise as people will take it has a advantage to kill themselves for small things and nobody will take action for them , if some students will fail then they will use as a advantage to suicide.

The New Cases Tests: If we consider this theory I will not be in favour of EUTHANASIA as suppose if there is someone from our own family who is suffering through the same situation than we will not file a petition for mercy killing .The only thing which we would could actually do is we would pray to God to reduce her sufferings rather than blocking the food supply, or going to the court. But if someone is suffering since 37years then I would be in favour of euthanasia as a person would be doing nothing but only living at the mercy of God. Even if there is someone from our family member who is suffering like this then I would plead in the court to let them perform mercy killing.

THE HIGHER PRINCIPLES TEST: This test ask us to determine if the principle on which we are basing our action is consistent with a higher one or more general principle we accept. This test examines our principles at a large. According to this, we work according to what principles, values and beliefs we have got from our parents our family. Thus, this principle forbids me from euthanasia because if our family members can provide us with everything and work only for the benfit of us such that we could grow and be a responsible person than is serving us from our very childhood then why cant we serve to their needs when they are suffering from such a terrible situation. Its not my responsibility to let any of my family member die and try to make them happy for every small reasons and try to make there happiest part of life.

MY OWN VIEW TO THIS EUTHANASIA:

I am personally not in favour of euthanasia in general case because my principles, my values, my teachings doesnt allow me to do the same. I would rather like to serve the person throughout their life rather than filing a petition. When we see ourselves dont know that whether the person suffering is happy or not than or he/ she doesnt want to live any further until then we have no rights to appeal for anything in the court. It should also be seen that if someone like DIANNE is been in this situation since past years there is no chance of improvement then she should be given permission for euthanasia because only in cases which is highly sensitive like that of DIANNE wherein she is in vegetative. Therefore we should be in favour of euthanasia only after judging every aspect of the case. Therefore if there is someone who is suffering from this case since past years then we should give them the permission for euthanasia otherwise this decision should be given only after proper scrutiny of the case and there should be proper and critical thinking made before giving judgement in any case. Lastly, I just want to say that Euthanasia is good when a person is suffering from a long time and is in a very critical situation were he cannot be cured otherwise he should not be given any permission as people will take in wrong way and student will use it as a weapon to do suicide when they will feel depressed or they will fail in exam or love.