Controversy Of Keown's Arguments Against Euthanasia

Through the decades of patients on direct or indirect life support from traumatic events, disabilities, or illnesses, euthanasia has been a heavily debated practice due to its moral disputes. Euthanasia is a necessary option as patients with clear judgement still have the right to refuse medical treatment and support. However, the practice is often brushed aside because of it impeding doctoral ethics to not harm their patients. Furthermore, one solution to this problem would be to examine the patient’s physical and mental conditions, then to ensure that the patient is mentally stable to make the decision of euthanasia on their own.

In the controversy of euthanasia, an argument for the practice is the patient’s right to refuse medical care.

Keown speaks about the doctrine of the Quality of life, a doctrine that considers both the value of treatment as well as the value of the patient’s life. Especially, while treatments may improve and help stabilize patients to regular health, the prospect of a normal life usually fades when attached to life support. Thus, the practice of euthanasia should be available to those under life support as while the treatment does keep patients alive, the quality of their mental and physical lives will likely not be the same as before medical assistance. In addition, Euthanasia is a practice that not only considers a patient’s quality of life, but also their sensibility and clarity to make such a decision. Patients who remain conscious reserve the ability to make decisions to their own body regardless of intent. In terms of their condition, a patient able to reasonably express their autonomy is allowed make the choice of euthanasia. Gorsuch writes Joseph Raz’s identification of autonomy, “...to exercise autonomy, an individual must be capable of

Some of the solutions include specifying the definition of euthanasia, further improve the quality of life for patients on life support, and encouraging other options of treatment. My possible solution would be to get a sense of the patient’s mental and physical conditions, then ensure they can make the sole decision of euthanasia. Physicians would have to gauge how much a patient is suffering mentally and physically whether from a traumatic event or a disability. Then, the physician would determine if the patient is able minded to make the decision of euthanasia. This solution solves the issue of certain patients truly suffering and rules out those who could receive further