Question

If someone could please help me with this question I would really appreciate it.

Case 9-1 regards Jack Kevorkian and his mercy killing of Thomas Youk. Kevorkian videotaped the killing by lethal injection while Youk signed a consent statement and also uttered his consent in the videotape recording. Kevorkian injected him with a paralyzing drug, a sedative and then finally with potassium chloride (a lethal drug that stops the heart). Youk was mentally lucid and asked for this euthanasia and gave his informed consent. Do you think this action was moral? If so what would you use to support your position. If not what moral theory would you use to support your position? How does your moral theory support your position? Should doctors have the right to put people to death who consent to it as we have it in the Death with Dignity act of Oregon? What moral theories or principles would you appeal to?

Answer 1

Just as people have the right to live a dignified life, people also have the right to die in a dignified way. When someone struggles with a terminal illness without any hope for survival, it would be appropriate to end one’s life using physician assisted suicide. This is because of the fact that the person would be suffering and struggling in pain without any hope for recovery. Utilitarian theory suggests that an act would be considered ethical if it maximizes benefit to maximum number of people and reduce any harm. This would mean ending one’s life in this condition would not only benefit the one dying but also the doctors, nurses, government and family members who spend their time, energy, resources while there is no result. Ending one’s life when one wishes to end would save everyone’s suffering and end the pain of the patient while also saving the resources and happiness of everyone concerned.

Thank you for your question. Please rate if you like the answer.