The Forum > Article Comments > We should respect the dying wishes of the terminally ill > Comments
We should respect the dying wishes of the terminally ill : Comments
By Leslie Cannold, published 14/2/2007We should have the freedom to decide about euthanasia, according to our needs and values.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- Page 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
-
- All
Consistent with his general ethical theory, Singer holds that the right to physical integrity is grounded in a being's ability to suffer, and the right to life is grounded in, among other things, the ability to plan and anticipate one's future.
- - - - - - - - - - -
Singer classifies euthanasia as voluntary, involuntary, or non-voluntary. (For possible similar historical definitions of euthanasia see Karl Binding, Alfred Hoche and Werner Catel.) Given his consequentialist approach, the difference between active and passive euthanasia is not morally significant, for the required act/omission doctrine is untenable; killing and letting die are on a moral par when their consequences are the same. Voluntary euthanasia, undertaken with the consent of the subject, is supported by the autonomy of persons and their freedom to waive their rights, especially against a legal background such as the guidelines developed by the courts in the Netherlands. Non-voluntary euthanasia at the beginning or end of life's journey, when the capacity to reason about what is at stake is undeveloped or lost, is justified when swift and painless killing is the only alternative to suffering for the subject.