Between the three passages, I chose Tom Beauchamp’s passage, “Justifying Physician-Assistant Deaths” (89). After reading Tom Beauchamp’s passage, I have decided that his reasons behind justifying physician-assisted suicide and active euthanasia is strong enough to persuade me into believing it could be justified. . His approach could be considered utilitarianism, in the sense that physician-assistance suicide focuses solely on the best interest of the patient. He had made a point in which passively letting someone die does not inflict harm or wrongdoing, and it has no violation of the patient’s rights (Beauchamp 89). So in comparison, there is no harm done by those who request assistance in ending their life when their death is inevitable regardless
…show more content…
Classical utilitarianism involved the levels of a person’s well-being based on the amount of pleasure and pain. Now, Brad Hooker’s idea of utilitarian involves more than just pleasure and pain, it also contributes knowledge and autonomy. He also believes that death does not always have to be a bad thing. It could lead to what is right for the person’s well-being (Hooker 77). There are two types of utilitarianism. One is rule-utilitarianism. This theory is set to have rules that must be followed in order to determine the greatest expected utility (76). The second theory is act-utilitarian. This theory states that an action is only right if its actual consequence, or expected utility, has great probability as any other consequence …show more content…
As long as the patient is suffering with excruciating pain, it should be his or her right to choose whether or not they want to request assistance in hastening their death. Going back to a person’s well-being, if death is inevitable in the long run, than there is no harm in quickening the process because the physician is helping them end their suffering not prolong it. Also, in regards to Beauchamp’s argument that law and medicine interfere with the patient’s right to choose how they want to proceed with their time left, we, as Americans, have freewill, and with that it gives us the opportunity to choose how we live our lives. However, some might say it is against the law to kill a human being, but is it really killing when the person is going to die eventually? With physician-assisted suicide the patient must be fully aware in requesting aid in ending their
Classical utilitarianism involved the levels of a person’s well-being based on the amount of pleasure and pain. Now, Brad Hooker’s idea of utilitarian involves more than just pleasure and pain, it also contributes knowledge and autonomy. He also believes that death does not always have to be a bad thing. It could lead to what is right for the person’s well-being (Hooker 77). There are two types of utilitarianism. One is rule-utilitarianism. This theory is set to have rules that must be followed in order to determine the greatest expected utility (76). The second theory is act-utilitarian. This theory states that an action is only right if its actual consequence, or expected utility, has great probability as any other consequence …show more content…
As long as the patient is suffering with excruciating pain, it should be his or her right to choose whether or not they want to request assistance in hastening their death. Going back to a person’s well-being, if death is inevitable in the long run, than there is no harm in quickening the process because the physician is helping them end their suffering not prolong it. Also, in regards to Beauchamp’s argument that law and medicine interfere with the patient’s right to choose how they want to proceed with their time left, we, as Americans, have freewill, and with that it gives us the opportunity to choose how we live our lives. However, some might say it is against the law to kill a human being, but is it really killing when the person is going to die eventually? With physician-assisted suicide the patient must be fully aware in requesting aid in ending their