Ethical Dilemma



Ethical Dilemma

Introduction

I have chosen “Euthanasia” as the specific area of contemporary social change relevant to the fields of health and social care and policy management. Euthanasia is the act or practice of killing somebody who has an incurable illness or injury, or of assisting that person to die in order to relieve patient's suffering and pain. Euthanasia is legal in Benelux counties (Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg) however it is illegal in most of the countries in the world. In this section, we have approached this concept and tried to apprehend it by the ethical perspectives of three economic approaches: utilitarianism, libertarianism and egalitarianism (Block, 2003,, P 39).

Euthanasia and Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism is the philosophy claiming that it is possible to quantify the pains and pleasures. Maximization of the sum of pleasures and pains should allow public to make rational choices. Two actions should be judged on their competence to bring either more welfare to people or welfare to more people. The one which brings more welfare to the maximum people should be preferred. Utilitarianism attempts to protect the fundamental rights of every individual in a society with a desired outcome to maximize aggregate welfare of the people (Block, 2003,, P 39). 

One of the fundamental rights people holds in a society is the right to access appropriate health and social care. In a utilitarian perspective, the right to health may be disregarded if it's resulting in less social benefits and happiness to the greatest people of society. For instance, why should society devote a certain percentage of resources to the persons who stands less or no chance to live and their life is likely to end soon (for instance, patients on ventilators or in coma) when the same money could be better invested in drug coverage for all the insured people? We can say that utilitarianism calls for utilization of resources in the context of cost-benefit. If the benefits (more happiness in terms of wider insurance coverage in a society) outweighs the cost (health care cost on people who stands less chance to live which puts burden on the pocket of the government which in turn could pass it on to the people). Utilitarianism does not pay any regard to an individual's right to choose. It takes into account only what is best for the society as a whole, not for some individuals with an aim to achieve maximization of benefits and happiness to the people (SNYDER, 2006, Pp. 88) (Block, 2010,, P 18).

Euthanasia and libertarianism

The opposite of Utilitarianism is Libertarianism because it takes into account the right of an individual to choose. However, interestingly enough, Libertarianism doesn't call for opposing the concept euthanasia absolutely. Libertarianism actually rejects every kind of coercion which the society or government tend to impose on individuals. For instance, as per the philosophy of Libertarianism, if an old patient who stands less or no chance to live due to his medical conditions (let's assume he is at the last stage of cancer) yet he is reluctant to choose Euthanasia and ...