Euthanasia And Kant’S Attitide To It

Introduction

For many decades, euthanasia has been a topic of constant debate and is still controversial in modern societies. Death, in most of the cases today, happens in the hospital far away from friends and family, in an environment which is more prone to loneliness and abandonment. “Whether the law should permit voluntary euthanasia or physician assisted suicide is one of the most vital questions facing all modern societies” as suggested by John Keown. In most of the countries which follow Christian Tradition, euthanasia and physician assisted suicide is morally disapproved because of strong belief in sanctity of human life. Different societies have given different meanings to the concept of personal autonomy.

Overview

Euthanasia has been derived from two words : eu – which means good, and thanatos – which means death. So the word Euthanasia basically means easy and calm or good death. But then, the most important question arises, “Is there really a good death?”. Euthanasia is the practice of depriving someone of his own life, which leads to peaceful and painless death. The meaning of Euthanasia is to cause the death of all those people who are terminally ill or all those who are suffering from incurable disease and are experiencing intense pain. Many people believe that the main motive of Euthanasia is the ultimate welfare of the patient. There are two most important criteria that should be considered while differentiating types of euthanasia. The first criteria is based on the consent given on behalf of the person over whom euthanasia is to be performed.

Voluntary Euthanasia is performed at the request of patient who expresses his wish to die. Non Voluntary Euthanasia is ending the patient’s life without his consent. In this case, there is no direct request for euthanasia, but the decision is taken merely based on the assumption that this should be done. The second criteria is based on the difference between letting someone die and killing someone. Active euthanasia means someone’s help in the process of dying, whereas on the contrary, passive euthanasia means allowing someone to die. In today’s time, many believe that voluntary euthanasia can be morally acceptable under the following strict conditions :

1. Only the patient who can take decision for themselves are allowed to ask for permission for euthanasia
2. A doctor must concern another doctor in order to hear an independent opinion.
3. A patient must be in a state in which he is going through unbearable pain and does not have any chance of recovery.

Kantianism and Euthanasia

Kantians strongly believe that one should always keep in mind that the under no circumstances can assistance over the course of dying be morally equivalent to murder, because murder means depriving someone of his life and that individual who is being murdered is not willing to die and also he is not terminally ill. Kant was strongly against suicide but he also claimed that there are some exceptions when things come to honor and dignity. Referring to the patient’s autonomy of decision making, many people argue whether Kant would approve voluntary euthanasia or oppose involuntary euthanasia. Autonomy of one’s own thinking his ability to make proper decisions are the basis of Kantian ethics. If we refer to someone’s autonomy, people can argue that patients have the right to make decisions about their own life and death. But all these patients should make the decisions about life and death when they are in their right state of mind. But at the same time, this argument can be unjustifiable for involuntary euthanasia. The act of depriving someone of his life who has not chosen to die shows lack of respect for autonomy of that person. But if the patient fails to express his interest in undergoing euthanasia, then doctor should not carry it out. Kant thinks that voluntary euthanasia of rational being is a very wrong principle. If every killing is wrong, then euthanasia is also wrong as it is also a form of killing. But also, according to Kant, there are circumstances in which suicide and murder can be morally justified.

Kant as Strongly Opposed of Suicide

Many interpreters considered Kant to be absolute non supporter of suicide. Also there are some people who believe that according to Kant, prohibition of suicide is a moral duty that should be applied without any exception. Kant believed that when someone takes their own life then they are violating the moral law. Kant claims that it is immoral to commit suicide in order to avoid a painful life. Some believe that Kant refers to self love. Also rational beings have moral duty to preserve their own lives as they have a kind of priceless value which Kant calls dignity. Kant believes that honor and humanity are virtues that give special value to a person. When a man loses these virtues, his life loses all the importance and becomes worthless because he is no longer capable of virtuous action. But in some special cases Kant believed that it better to sacrifice life then to forfeit morality, i. e when a man is dishonest, it’s his duty to give up his own life before dishonoring the humanity.