Euthanasia

Euthanasia



ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to take this chance for thanking my research facilitator, friends & family for support they provided & their belief in me as well as guidance they provided without which I would have never been able to do this research.

DECLARATION

I, (Your name), would like to declare that all contents included in this thesis/dissertation stand for my individual work without any aid, & this thesis/dissertation has not been submitted for any examination at academic as well as professional level previously. It is also representing my very own views & not essentially which are associated with university.

Signature:

Date:



Table of Contents

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTii

DECLARATIONiii

Table of Contents1

Introduction2

Background of the Study4

Aims and objectives5

Chapter 01: History of Euthanasia6

Chapter 02 :Comparative study on Euthanasia Law11

Chapter 03: Recent Proposals20

Euthanasia and the Law20

Dr. Death20

Dr. Jack Kevorkian, the Utilitarian:21

Utilitarian Viewpoint22

Anti Assisted Killing23

Case study of Dax Cowart24

Case study of Terri Schiavo24

Chapter 04: Utilitarianism Theories26

Rachels' Justification of Preference Utilitarianism26

Peter Singer's Justification of Preference Utilitarianism30

Hare's Theory of Preference Utilitarianism34

Chapter 05: Human Rights Issues in Euthanasia41

Conclusion44

Introduction

Euthanasia is presently the most important issue in the field of bioethics. This dissertation challenges the justifications for euthanasia, particularly those grounded on autonomy, which critics of euthanasia have been remiss in addressing. This dissertation examines that, can current Euthanasia Law be justified on utilitarian grounds. Utilitarian argue for euthanasia and avoids the deficiencies of classical utilitarianism. They seek to maximize preferences, and argue for euthanasia when the patient and his loved ones prefer to terminate his suffering. Utilitarian can countenance euthanasia without being logically committed to other types of killing that even philosophers acknowledge as untenable. In allowing the patient to be euthanized when he seeks death, preference utilitarian raises the issue of autonomy and thus serves as an effective foil for the critique of liberalism's justification of euthanasia. Contemporary liberals argue for rights to issues of personal morality, even in the face of social opposition in terms of autonomy: society cannot impose morality to prevent an individual from committing self regarding acts, and therefore acts such as euthanasia must be permitted because the individual is not harming others.

This dissertation argues that preference utilitarian and liberals extol the same value and autonomy, and that preference utilitarian offer the more coherent, moral and political theory. Individual autonomy must be limited in certain instances, but contemporary liberals are unable to circumscribe it without imposing a morality and thereby undermining one of the fundamental tenets of their political theory. Preference utilitarian can consistently apply their principle to limit autonomy even they are burdened with the logical and unacceptable implications of their theory. Neither preference utilitarianism nor liberalism can offer a coherent justification for euthanasia. This dissertation offers a natural understanding of human life, and explains its proscription against euthanasia.

Liberal Autonomy can be defined as, the person right to be self determinant. There is a perception that autonomy is related to maximizing self interest, work for personal goals and achieved own goals regardless of interest of society. Euthanasia can be justified by Liberal Autonomy. If we analyze euthanasia in the frame work ...