euthanasia

The Utilitarian Argument

The creed which accepts as the foundation of morals, Utility, or the Greatest Happiness Principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness. By happiness is intended pleasure, and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain, and the privation of pleasure… pleasure, and freedom from pain, are the only things desirable as ends; and that all desirable things are desirable either for the pleasure inherent in themselves, or as means to the promotion of pleasure and the prevention of pain.

J.S. Mill Utilitarianism

Hedonism: The only thing of intrinsic value is pleasure and the only thing of intrinsic disvalue is pain. Utility is the overall value of pleasure, minus the overall disvalue of pain.Utilitarianism: An action is morally permissible if and only if it maximizes utility.

I have quoted Alsop at length not for the sake of indulging in gory details but give a clear idea of the kind of suffering we are talking about. We should not gloss over these facts with euphemistic language or squeamishly avert our eyes from them. For only by keeping them firmly and vividly in mind can we appreciate the full force of the argument from mercy.

James RachelsThe Morality of Euthanasia

The Utilitarian Argument

1) An action is morally permissible if it would maximize utility.

2) Active euthanasia would maximize utility in many cases.

3) Active euthanasia is morally permissible in many cases.

Today there is such a wide range of protocols to deal with pain and depression, that virtually no one should suffer. If a person is suffering the effects of pain and depression this is tantamount to medical malpractice.

John McGowanKitsap Sun

• 40% = (Physical) Pain• 63% = Loss of autonomy • 69% = Quality of life

Pearlman and Starks“Why do People Seek Physician-

Assisted Death?”

The Utilitarian Argument

1) An action is morally permissible if it would maximize utility.

2) Active euthanasia would maximize utility in many cases.

3) Active euthanasia is morally permissible in many cases.

!!!

There is a related difficulty for utilitarianism, which connects more directly with the topic of euthanasia. Suppose a person is leading a miserable life… but does not want to die. This person thinks that a miserable life is better than none at all. Now I assume that we would agree that the person should not be killed; that would be plain, unjustifiable murder. Yet it would decrease the amount of misery in the world if we killed the this person… so it is hard to see how, on strictly utilitarian grounds, it could be wrong.

The Utilitarian Argument

1) An action is morally permissible if it would maximize utility.

2) Active euthanasia would maximize utility in many cases.

3) Active euthanasia is morally permissible in many cases.

The Best Interests Argument

1) An action is morally permissible if it would maximize utility without violating anyone’s rights.

2) Active euthanasia would maximize utility in many cases without violating anyone’s rights.

3) Active euthanasia is morally permissible in many cases.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Thomas JeffersonDeclaration of Independence

The Best Interests Argument

1) An action is morally permissible if it would maximize utility without violating anyone’s rights.

2) Active euthanasia would maximize utility in many cases without violating anyone’s rights.

3) Active euthanasia is morally permissible in many cases.