Problem:
The arguments for the practice of euthanasia can be expressed in both utilitarian and duty-oriented terms. In the first case, it can be argued as a concern and compassion for those who are painfully and/or terminally ill. This view is strongly put forward by the noted ethicist and theologian Joseph Fletcher, who feels that it is harder morally to justify letting someone die a slow and ugly death, dehumanized, than it is to justify helping him to escape from such misery. This is a case at least in any code of ethics which is humanististic or personalistic, i.e., in any code of ethics which has a value system that puts humanness and personal integrity above biological life and function. The duty-oriented arguments are centered on an extension of personal autonomy-the rights accorded us in Western societies to live our life according to our own vision, unrestricted by the views of others. If we can live our lives according to a personal inner vision, then should this aspect of human dignity based on free choice also be extended to the termination of our lives? For those who oppose active euthanasia on religious grounds, the basic concern seems to be the view that our lives are not ours but gifts from God. In this view, humans hold their lives as a trust. If this is true, then we are bound to hold not only the lives of others inviolate but also our own, since to take our life is to destroy what belongs to God. Need Assignment Help?