1

Did The Doctor Do the Right Thing?

Name.

Course.
School
Due Dat
 2

Did The Doctor Do the Right Thing?

Introduction
A landmark euthanasia case on medical practice in relation to euthanasia in the
Netherlands has brought up a moral dilemma that is widely debated around the world
(The Guardian, 2019). A medical professional who was a qualified doctor was
dragged to court for euthanizing a patient with advanced dementia. The patient had
previously expressed her desire to die when she was still mentally competent (The
Guardian, 2019). The case raises questions about the morality of euthanasia and the
ethics of ending the life of a patient with dementia. My answer to this question is that
the doctor's decision to euthanize the patient with advanced dementia was morally
justifiable, however, the decision cannot be without its own share of controversy as
ultimately the answer to whether the doctor did the right thing depends on one's moral
and ethical principles.
From a utilitarian perspective, the doctor's decision to euthanize the patient can
be justified. According to the moral theory of utilitarianism, everyone should be as
happy as possible. In this instance, the physician's choice to euthanize the patient can
be seen as promoting happiness by ending the patient's suffering and fulfilling her
wishes. The patient was suffering from advanced dementia, and the disease had
severely impacted her quality of life. The patient had expressed a desire to die while
she was still competent, and her family members had agreed with her decision. The
doctor was able to spare the patient from enduring a protracted time of pain by
terminating her life. We can support this assertion with a quote from the reading by
Mills that was assigned for class: "The ideology that takes utility, or the greatest
possible happiness presumption, as the justification of moralitybelieves that actions
are appropriate in measure to how they contribute to advance satisfaction and are
improper in proportion to how they aim to produce the opposite of happiness." (Mill,
1863). This statement from Mill, which stresses the significance of fostering pleasure
and minimizing pain, is connected to the case. In this case, the doctor's decision can
be seen as promoting happiness by ending the patient's suffering and fulfilling her
wishes.
From a deontological perspective, the doctor's decision to euthanize the patient
can be justified. This argument can be backed by its principles. Deontological ethics
is a moral philosophy that focuses on the duty to act in a particular way, irrespective
of the consequences.In this instance, the physician's choice for mercy death of the
 3

patient can be seen as respecting the patient's independence and right to make
decisions about her own body. The patient had expressed a desire to die while she was
still competent, and the doctor followed the legal requirements for euthanasia in the
Netherlands, including obtaining a second opinion from another doctor. Bentham
(1781) backs this argument-stating:"The concept of utility doesn't really imply that
any particular enjoyment, such as music, for example, or any particular relief from
suffering, such as, for instance, healthcare, are to be regarded at as access to a
communal something referred to as happiness and to be wanted on that basis." They
are wanted and attractive in and of themselves; in addition to serving as means, they
also contribute to the goal (Bentham, 1781).This quote from Bentham emphasizes that
the desire for pleasure and the avoidance of pain are inherent in human nature. In this
case, the patient was seeking to avoid prolonged suffering and pain. The doctor's
decision to euthanize the patient respected her autonomy and right to make decisions
about her own body, which can be seen as a way of promoting pleasure and avoiding
pain.
Conclusion
The ethical question of whether the doctor did the right thing in administering
euthanasia to the patient is a complex one with no easy answer, however my answer
to this question is that the doctor's decision to euthanize the patient with advanced
dementia was morally justifiable.
To summarize all paragraphs :it is clear from the first argument in paragraph one
that a utilitarian perspective, the doctor's decision to administer euthanasia can be
justified as a means to alleviate the patient's pain and distress. However, from a
deontological perspective as articulated by paragraph two, euthanasia is seen as a
violation of the sanctity of life and the Hippocratic Oath, making the doctor's actions
in this case ethically wrong.
On a personal account, I feel that This case highlights the difficult ethical
decisions that medical professionals sometimes face when treating terminally ill
patients.Doctors must make sure they are working in the clients' best interests while
honoring their ethical duties as medical experts by thoroughly weighing the ethical
ramifications of their decisions.
 4

References

Bentham, J. (1781). An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation.

Retrieved February 22, 2023, from
https://historyofeconomicthought.mcmaster.ca/bentham/morals.pdf

The Gurdian . (2019, August 26). Netherlands euthanasia case: Doctor 'acted with
Best Intentions'. The Guardian. Retrieved February 22, 2023, from
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/26/doctor-on-trial-landmark-
euthanasia-case-netherlands-dementia

Mill, J. S. (1863). Utilitarianism John Stuart Mill - McMaster Faculty of Social

Sciences. Retrieved February 22, 2023, from
https://socialsciences.mcmaster.ca/econ/ugcm/3ll3/mill/utilitarianism.pdf