ipl-logo

Slippery Slope Argument Against Euthanasia

1038 Words5 Pages

The Slippery Slope argument also suggests if euthanasia is legalised then it will not just be to those with a terminal illness. It will gradually include more and more people into the category for those who euthanasia is acceptable for: such as it may start to include people with emotional suffering or common disabilities. Also going down the road of the slippery slope argument people believe euthanasia will stop people looking into palliative care treatments and stop people from looking for cures to terminal illnesses.
Most Christians would argue that we should not legalise euthanasia they do not think it is right. When I interviewed students from Wheaton High School (Chicago) they said they disagree with euthanasia because we would be ruining God’s plan. Christians believe that God is the giver and taker of life. Therefore we shouldn't …show more content…

Therefore, they disagree with euthanasia because they think it is part of God’s plan and it allows the sufferer to share Christ's agony. They think Christ will be there to share their suffering. Overall meaning a Christian would not agree with euthanasia being legalised.
A utilitarian would be more likely to support euthanasia being legalised. Utilitarians think that every action should cause the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people as Jeremy Bentham said, “it is the greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and wrong.”, and the final result should determine the moral worth of the original action. Therefore if the final result of euthanasia was to increase the happiness of the person and decrease their pain then a consequentialist utilitarian would argue that euthanasia should be legalised because the final result is better for the person. Bentham claimed

Show More
Related
655 Words | 3 Pages

So that’s why I feel that the Christianity best states my views on euthanasia. There are many reasons why I believe that Christianity and the Oregon Death with dignity act have completely different views on euthanasia. For example, The Oregon death with dignity is not against euthanasia, but Christianity is against euthanasia. The Oregon death with dignity act basically allowing ill people to end their lives whenever they want to, but the person has to be 18 years old or older. They usually do that with the lethal medications that are prescribed by a physician.

Read More
1457 Words | 6 Pages

but I do not find this argument very persuasive. I truly believe the slippery slope argument is hypothetical. There is no proof that Physician Assisted Suicide would be abused if it became legalized. In the state of

Read More
1025 Words | 5 Pages

Proceeding with euthanasia is simply an act of murder, despite opposing disagreements of others. Another perspective based on a Christian includes the strength of an individual to fight on, and continue with their life, regardless of the amount of pain they are faced with, as this is all God’s order and wish to every human, to soldier on and only die of natural

Read More
1673 Words | 7 Pages

Rachels looks at the utilitarian argument which states that if an action increases happiness or decreases unhappiness it is morally acceptable, therefore killing a suffering patients, who requests to die, decreases their unhappiness and can be morally acceptable However, Rachels doesn’t see this argument as sound because happiness and unhappiness are not the only things to consider morally. To argue this Rachels uses the example that limiting religion may increase happiness, but that doesn’t make is morally acceptable because it denies people the ability to make their own decisions. Rachel then goes to create his argument, which uses both a mercy and utilitarian approach. The mercy argument justifies euthanasia when it puts an end to a patient’s agony and suffering. Rachels uses an example of a twenty eight year old man named Jack who suffers from terminal cancer.

Read More
955 Words | 4 Pages

Some claim that only God should have the power to take a life because he’s the one that gives it. Others say that the illness could correct itself somehow. Some of the claims against euthanasia are along the lines of, “Euthanasia would not only be for people who are terminally ill”, “Euthanasia will become non-voluntary”, “Legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide leads to suicide contagion”, “Euthanasia is a rejection of the importance and value of human life”, “Euthanasia gives too much power to doctors”, and “Euthanasia is against the word and will of God.” To me, euthanasia should be the choice of the person who’s ill. Yes, they should talk to their families about it and get doctors opinions, but ultimately, it should be up to the patient.

Read More
1376 Words | 6 Pages

In a nutshell, euthanasia means “good death” literally but it is in fact the opposite. It should not only be ignored by Christianity, Islam and Judaism, but also by any human being who believe in God and appreciate the scrumptious flavor of life, this precious gift that deserves from us to hang on there and persevere in spite of all difficulties we may encounter. Don’t you think

Read More
2289 Words | 10 Pages

Also, it is your life, so no one should make your major life decisions for you. You are the one that decides when things should happen, not the “universe”. Another argument against the legalization of Euthanasia is that it goes against the divinity of God and is unreligious. Some people say that God is behind the universe and that he is the one that decides when you should die. This argument may seem convincing at first, but furthering your research will help you realize that God wants you to be happy.

Read More
697 Words | 3 Pages

Opponents are concerned that by legalizing the euthanasian of terminally ill patients, then it would lead to the euthanasian of patients that are capable of living long lives. Imagine the horror of being able to get assistance in dying simply because the patient is mentally incompetent or is mentally ill. Usually if someone has suicidal thoughts or wants to commit suicide, people of the medical profession do everything in their power to help save them. If terminally ill patients want assistance in killing themselves, then physicians are not fitted for the job. Physicians should be helping their patients, not killing them.

Read More
647 Words | 3 Pages

The slippery slope argument has been argued for years. It is well known that Dr. Jack Kevorkian could be the poster child of the slippery slope argument. He assisted many people in their own euthanizing,

Read More
110 Words | 1 Pages

The argument of ending life being a slippery slope can be dispelled to a certain degree when it comes to ethical reasoning. Proponents see assisted suicide as a risk to the elderly and uninsured who may feel compelled to request assistance to end life to avoid being a burden to family and or society (Ersek,2004, table 2). Protocol can and would be in place that would assure measures are taken to those seeking to die on their own terms can do so. This choice is done freely without consequence to themselves or by the doctors assisting by determining factors that would safeguard against abuse of the choice to end

Read More
1149 Words | 5 Pages

On the other hand, Catholic morals and values can reject assisted suicide. Many Catholics believe that God created you thus only God can take you away from your life. This would hold true even if a patient is suffering and wants to die. Catholics believe that no physician could help kill a patient; only God can take the patient from the Earth. Although some people do belief this, I believe that all humans can make their own choices and if someone’s choice is to die through assisted suicide because they feel that they aren’t getting any better than it should be that patient’s doctor to help get them there.

Read More
950 Words | 4 Pages

The ideology follows that an action is morally right if it serves to increase the amount of happiness in the world and decrease the amount of misery. James goes on to explain that the policy of killing hopelessly miserable terminally ill patients would serve to decrease the amount of unhappiness in the world. Thus, under utilitarianism, euthanasia would be a justified form of killing, as it decreases the amount of suffering in the

Read More
2035 Words | 9 Pages

Homelessness can be simply be defined by a person having no home to call their own. There is a variety of reason that this could come to be, whether it be the individual's fault or not. No matter how homelessness was brought on, it does not change the fact that having no home is a failure to meet basic human rights. For years, homelessness has been a global issue.

Read More
1341 Words | 6 Pages

For example, if a parent has a newborn who has a severe disability, then they can request euthanasia and this is part of the pro-euthanasia argument, that it can be legalized as long as the cause of killing someone is justified but what they fail to understand is the measure of reasons that can be accepted for euthanasia as opinions vary a lot(Lewis, 2007, p. 197). This pro-euthanasia argument proves that even those for euthanasia want certain limitations as they too realize that this issue is morally unacceptable, whether a patient's problems are mental or physical. In my view, when people start to tolerate euthanasia, humanity lowers its discomfort standards and tolerance. Death comes to all people and everyone has to go through a tough experience regarding matters of life and death, but when euthanasia is legalized, people will most likely take a choice that lessens their suffering quickly, most likely "the death". Assisted suicide is another matter which will be dragged into this arguments because if euthanasia is legalized, so will be assisted suicide, where people who want to die will try this method would want to favor euthanasia and try to get lawful restrictions reduced(Lewis, 2007,

Read More
1234 Words | 5 Pages

A controversial practice that invokes a debate over how beneficial its intentions are is the use of euthanasia. The argument switches between whether or not putting terminally ill patients to death with the assistance of a physician is justifiable and right. Legalizing the practice of euthanasia is a significant topic among many people in society, including doctors and nurses in the medical field, as it forces people to decide where to draw the line between relieving pain and simply killing. While some people see euthanasia as a way to helping a patient by eliminating their pain, it is completely rejected by others who see it as a method of killing.

Read More

More about Slippery Slope Argument Against Euthanasia

Related Topics

Open Document