Imagine a dog admitted to a pet hospital. They recently went through surgery, but still expresses excruciating pain. The vet advises to “put them down” or to “take them out of their misery.” What should you do? As human beings, we can't help but empathize nonhuman things like our pets. Being able to witness small frail creatures in distress encourages us to "help" them in ways to not feel discomfort. Therefore, we believe we should relieve them of their misery. But if we truly think critically about the situation, the decisions that we made were based on impulse and intuition. We don’t really know what the dog had wanted in that situation. If the dog was able to communicate with us, would they reject facing "unwanted" death and choose to live
…show more content…
Does it maximize happiness overall for those that are involved? Within the consequentialism concept of Utilitarianism, permitting assisted suicide will not promote happiness. The idea of assisted suicide is too disturbing to exist. Death is not something so easily discussed or demonstrated, but Utilitarianism is maximizing happiness for those involved, so if we think like a Utilitarian and apply it to the concept of impartiality, does it maximize happiness then? Yes, because if the patient agrees to assisted suicide, they’ll be happy with the choice they made that reduced their pain and suffering. The family involved will be impartially sad to see their beloved member gone, but will also be glad to see them die a peaceful death. The family’s happiness will outweigh more than their sadness if the patient went through with assisted suicide because this will help the family grieve faster and in a healthier style. A doctor’s duty is to heal the patients, but if they apply assisted suicide as healing that reduces pain and maximizes pleasure, they will also be happy for the patient, especially if the patient had wanted it and gave consent. Overall, a Utilitarian will think assisted suicide is morally acceptable because it maximizes happiness for those
Does it maximize happiness overall for those that are involved? Within the consequentialism concept of Utilitarianism, permitting assisted suicide will not promote happiness. The idea of assisted suicide is too disturbing to exist. Death is not something so easily discussed or demonstrated, but Utilitarianism is maximizing happiness for those involved, so if we think like a Utilitarian and apply it to the concept of impartiality, does it maximize happiness then? Yes, because if the patient agrees to assisted suicide, they’ll be happy with the choice they made that reduced their pain and suffering. The family involved will be impartially sad to see their beloved member gone, but will also be glad to see them die a peaceful death. The family’s happiness will outweigh more than their sadness if the patient went through with assisted suicide because this will help the family grieve faster and in a healthier style. A doctor’s duty is to heal the patients, but if they apply assisted suicide as healing that reduces pain and maximizes pleasure, they will also be happy for the patient, especially if the patient had wanted it and gave consent. Overall, a Utilitarian will think assisted suicide is morally acceptable because it maximizes happiness for those