Philippa Foot Euthanasia Summary

To ascertain whether euthanasia is morally permissible a great deal of reasoning is required, in “Euthanasia” Phillipa Foot lays out her logic for rationalizing the subject by providing several instances defending and disputing euthanasia. Foot takes the traditional definition of euthanasia, that exclusively specifies a particular manner of death, to encompass the grounds upon which an individual considers to come about making the choice to end their life. Foot holds the belief that euthanasia is morally justified when one's quality of life is so depleted that death would bring about the greatest amount of good for that one person involved. For something to be good, it must be beneficial for an individual in particular. Foot expresses two conditions where people have historically found death to be considered the best outcome. First the article discusses an instance where death was thought to be …show more content…
Foot believes though that there are extraordinary conditions that warrant exceptions to be made, permitting us to respect a person's right to autonomy when one decides that death will bring about the highest level of good. When living under a standard or normality one can likely see death as a release from pain that they are not able to obtain any other way. Further, Foot only argues for the legalization voluntary passive euthanasia, though she believes other forms may be morally permissible at times. Foot makes her case by explaining that “allowing the person's death at their own hands is permissible, but not bringing about their death even if that is what they want”. Foot gives individual's prima facie rights; meaning every person has the right to noninterference of their actions by others, even if it is contrary to their well being. This allows for us to let others act in contrary to their own interest and not be wrong, as long as we do not assist