Автор: Пользователь скрыл имя, 31 Марта 2013 в 09:27, статья
An issue of opposition of morality and law arises in our society very frequently, with people’s favors been given to one of them depending on the case being decided. However when it comes to the problem of application of euthanasia, there is no clear solution of it both from moral and from legal points of view. Moreover, when being analyzed both of the approaches do not give an exact decision of how an issue may be solved, thus confusing it even more. This work analyzes the most frequent type of euthanasia that is often referred as PAS (Physician Assisted Suicide) – the process of killing a patient, who has an incurable illness with no hope to recover and suffering from unbearable pain, after being asked for that by the patient him/herself. 1
Westminster International University in Tashkent
Name of the course
CIFS
2011 - 2012
To be completed by the student
Student’s ID number |
00001758 |
Module name |
Introduction to Law |
Module code |
2UZB316 |
Tutor |
Malika Mukimova |
Individual assignment |
0 |
Group assignment |
0 |
Submission deadline |
26, March, 2012 |
|
I certify that all material in this coursework which is not my own work has been acknowledged and I am fully aware of the consequences of plagiarism.
Signed
|
Legal and moral approaches to an issue of euthanasia
An issue of opposition of morality and law arises in our society very frequently, with people’s favors been given to one of them depending on the case being decided. However when it comes to the problem of application of euthanasia, there is no clear solution of it both from moral and from legal points of view. Moreover, when being analyzed both of the approaches do not give an exact decision of how an issue may be solved, thus confusing it even more. This work analyzes the most frequent type of euthanasia that is often referred as PAS (Physician Assisted Suicide) – the process of killing a patient, who has an incurable illness with no hope to recover and suffering from unbearable pain, after being asked for that by the patient him/herself. 1
Morality aims to find what is right and what is wrong in the actions and behavior of people. The case of euthanasia makes this aim very confused. The reason is that within one moral approach to the issue there are two absolutely different ways of how it may be considered.
The first point of view asserts that the person willing to die by applying euthanasia should be helped in doing that as it is unbearable for him/her to suffer from pain. For his relatives and other people who are in close relations with the patient, it is also very much painful to see him/her suffering and the fact that they cannot do anything to help makes this pain even harder. Moreover, the patient is going to die no matter whether euthanasia is applied or refused to take place, so to let him die in dignity could be more humane.2 All of these evidences give a sort of an excuse for assisting in the death of a person in purpose of helping him.
The second point of view consists in realizing by the people close to the patient that the person they love is being killed. Realizing this fact maybe more difficult rather than to realize that they cannot help him/her, so it may be morally unacceptable to take one’s life. Apart from that, if euthanasia takes place, an assistant who carries it out will probably have a feeling of guilt that he killed a person and not a peace of mind for rendering a mercy; meanwhile his duty is to save lives. In addition, helping a person to die breaks moral standards of medics, who once have taken an Asclepiades'
1. BBC, ‘Key terms and definitions’ (Ethics guide, 26 March 2012)
2. BBC, ‘Pro-euthanasia arguments’ (Ethics guide, 26 March 2012)
[Hippocratic] Oath “not to give anyone a deadly drug and not to show any way of doing that”.3
If all the evidences of moral approach are contemplated, there is still no any specific answer or solution of the problem stated and as a result a dilemma arises which does not accept any inclination towards a particular decision. The approach that is right from one moral point of view turns out to be wrong from another one and vice-versa.
Legal approach to an issue of euthanasia is not less confusing than the moral one. The problem of legal approach consists in the fact that in most countries legislations there are no any articles dedicated to this issue. To solve this problem an alternative approach is needed that is based on consideration of several articles that are opposing to each other.
On the one hand, in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights it is stated that “Everyone has a right to life, liberty and security of person”. 4 This international declaration serves as a basis of most constitutions worldwide. For instance, in the Constitution of the Republic of Uzbekistan, it is stated that “The right to life is an inalienable right of every person. Encroachment on this right is the worst crime”.5 Encroachment of a right to life, that is considered to be a premeditated murder in case of euthanasia is punished by “from ten to fifteen years of imprisonment”6 according to the Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan. Apart from that there is another article concerning breach of duties by officials in the Criminal Code. According to it “Breach or improper performance of duties that caused a death of a person is to be punished with up to five years of imprisonment and deprivation of a particular right”.7 If this article is applied to euthanasia, an assistant who carried it out is to be imprisoned for breaching his duty to treat a patient for an illness, and accordance to the article mentioned before, for premeditated murder as there is no legislation about euthanasia that could have repudiate the charges.
On the other hand, in the Constitution of The republic of Uzbekistan it is also said that “Every person has a right of freedom and inviolability”8 and “Implementations of rights
3. Lechebnik.info, ‘Text of Hippocratic Oath’ (Asclepiades' Oath, 25 March 2012)
4. UN, ‘The Universal Declaration of Human Rights’ (Article 3, 18 March 2012)
5. Constitution of the Republic of Uzbekistan: Personal Rights and freedoms (Sharq, 2008) Article 24
6. Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan: Personal Crime. Article 97
7. Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan: Crime Against Administrative procedures. Article 207
8. Constitution of the Republic of Uzbekistan: Personal Rights and freedoms (Sharq, 2008) Article 25
and freedoms by a person must not breach the legal interests, rights and freedoms of other people, state and society”9. If a wish to die by applying euthanasia is considered
taking into account the two articles of the Constitution mentioned above, that turns out to be absolutely legal for a person to dispose his own life including a wish to be killed, as this action does not encroach anyone’s rights and does not put the society in danger.
However, it has to be admitted that legalization of euthanasia has a number of drawbacks like an upgrowth of crime, when people may be forced to apply for euthanasiato be conducted in selfish reasons of heirs or “vulnerable patients may be pressurized into dying”10.
In addition to the points of view mentioned above, there is another dilemma that arises in case of legal approach: does the “right to life” that is given to us by both International Declaration of Human Rights and by Constitution gives us a “right to die” as well? This kind of vagueness also sets a difficulty in comprehension of legal approach and a concrete answer on this question could probably give a solution of the whole issue.
From all of the facts mentioned above, it can easily be seen that neither law nor morality cannot provide a solution of the issue and are opposed not only to each other but also to themselves as well. Despite that, in some countries, that are mainly developed ones, euthanasia is applied on legal grounds.In Netherlands, for instance, euthanasia has been conducted legally from 2002, if was asked for by a patient, who is in his/her right mind, for two times. Final decision is made by a commission consisting of two medics, a lawyer and a specialist on ethics, and in case if some doubts arise the case is directed to prosecutor’s office.11 Such kind of approach may be accepted by many other countries as is quite reasonable from all points of view concerning legal aspect. Still, it is hard to come up with a right decision that can solve the moral conflict of the issue.
9. Constitution of the Republic of Uzbekistan: Personal Rights and freedoms (Sharq, 2008) Article 20
10. BBC, ‘Pro-euthanasia arguments’ (Ethics guide, 26 March 2012)
11. RosBalt.ru, ‘In the Netherlands euthanasia will be conducted at home’ (25 March 2012)
Bibliography
Books:
Constitution of the Republic of Uzbekistan: Personal Rights and freedoms (Sharq, 2008) Article 20
Constitution of the Republic of Uzbekistan: Personal Rights and freedoms (Sharq, 2008) Article 24
Constitution of the Republic of Uzbekistan: Personal Rights and freedoms (Sharq, 2008) Article 25
Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan: Crime Against Administrative procedures. Article 207
Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan: Personal Crime. Article 97
Web-Sites:
BBC, ‘Key terms and definitions’ (Ethics guide)
< http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/
BBC, ‘Pro-euthanasia arguments’ (Ethics guide)
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/
Lechebnik.info, ‘Text of Hippocratic Oath’ (Asclepiades' Oath)
< http://lechebnik.info/7-15.htm
RosBalt.ru, ‘In the Netherlands euthanasia will be conducted at home’ (25 March 2012)
<http://www.rosbalt.ru/main/
UN, ‘The Universal Declaration of Human Rights’:
Article 3 http://www.un.org/en/
Информация о работе Аспекты эвтаназии в Узбекистане (english)