Introduction
Among many ethical challenges, the bio-medical revolution is forcing upon individuals today is the question of euthanasia and the values that should be used to make ethical decision-making with respect to this practice (Dennis, 2009). Indeed, debates about the topic of euthanasia are grounded on moral and personal views, and the requests for euthanasia are often complicated to handle owing to the moral and ethical underpinnings related to the issue (Dees et al., 2012). The present paper compares the Christian worldview to own worldview assumptions of euthanasia with the intention of demonstrating that some of the bases for positions normally taken on the topic of euthanasia are not sufficient and that a new foundation is needed.
Ethical Dilemma
The ethical dilemma revolves around a woman who fractured her vertebrae while swimming with friends and became paralyzed from her shoulders down. Her quadriplegic condition triggered intense depression and thoughts about ending her own life, in large part due to the fact that her quality of life was severely diminished and her future looked horribly bleak.
It is difficult to make an ethical decision owing to the fact that, although the woman has been forced to endure a life of suffering and hardship, her wish to be euthanized raises serious moral and ethical concerns. The two options that could be used to resolve the scenario include (1) granting the woman’s wish to undergo euthanasia and (2) using strategies to ensure that the woman rediscovers herself as a worthy human being to facilitate an improvement in quality of life.
Available literature demonstrates that “ethical decision making must balance the rights of an individual to decide for him/herself, the views of the society as a whole, and the desires and wishes of a family and others close to an individual” (Dennis, 2009, p. 37). Drawing from this exposition, the ethical decisions which might be taken in the first option (granting euthanasia) include guaranteeing the rights of the woman to make her own decisions and developing mechanisms to deal with the aggravated pain and suffering. The ethical decisions which might be taken in the second option (improvement of quality of life) include an inclination to preserve life and facilitation of palliative care.
Core Beliefs
Available literature demonstrates that the main beliefs about God and humanity from the Christian worldview that are relevant to this scenario include:
- sanctity of life and respect for human dignity,
- commitment to life,
- the biblical teaching that “though shall not murder”,
- orientation that God is sovereign over life and death, as well as
- commitment to the perspective that no individual is beyond Christ’s compassion (Sullivan, 2005).
Additionally, with respect to euthanasia, Christians not only believe that humans are all created by God and are responsible to God for their actions, but also project orientation that death is not the end because human beings have eternal souls, and that suffering should always evoke compassionate care which does not involve euthanasia to solve the suffering (Harding & Patrick, 1995). These worldview commitments of Christians may influence own decision making with regard to the described scenario as it is a well-known fact that an individual’s view on morally or ethically acceptable behavior is deeply impacted by the dominant worldview (Delkeskamp-Hayes, 2003). As such, it is possible that my own capacity to make ethically and/or morally sound decisions on ending the life of the woman (active euthanasia) or assisting the woman to end her own life (passive euthanasia) due to her severely diminished quality of life may be superseded by the Christian worldview of ensuring the sanctity of life and respect for human dignity.
Resolution
The Christian worldview’s proposal for solving the ethical dilemma should be seen within the realms of ensuring the sanctity of life and respect for human dignity. From the scenario, it is evident that the woman’s wish to end her own life should not be granted owing to the fact that her condition cannot be perceived as terminal and her death is not clearly imminent (Engelhardt & Smith, 2005). The woman is also still young (17 years old when she fractured her vertebrae), implying that it would be morally and ethically wrong to grant her wish to die based on the vague perception that there has been a loss of personhood (Sullivan, 2005). According to the Christian view, the person in the scenario should act to enhance the capacity for palliative care in terms of pain management, symptom control, as well as psychological and spiritual support. Such an orientation, according to Delkeskamp-Hayes (2003), not only improves the quality of life of the woman but also safeguards the sanctity of life and respect for human dignity. Drawing from this elaboration, the best course of action for a Christian is to encourage the woman to seek palliative care for her injuries, while reminding her that life is God-given and thus its sanctity should be safeguarded because it is only God who has the absolute right to take it away.
Evaluation
Some of the unintended consequences of the resolution proposed by the Christian worldview include:
- prolongation of suffering due to diminished quality of life,
- obstruction of the principle of autonomy which gives the woman the right to make her own independent decisions,
- refusal to acknowledge the woman’s condition may never be curable in spite of continued treatment.
The perceived benefits include comfort arising from respecting the word of God which calls us to respect the sanctity of life, improved quality of life arising from the provided palliative care, as well as happiness and compassion emanating from the realization that the will of God is taking its natural course.
Comparison
In the present scenario, the Christian worldview is more effective than an option that may expose the woman to euthanasia not only because it provides room for improvement through palliative care, but also due to the fact that it emboldens hope in the woman that no patient is beyond human compassion. In contrast, the euthanasia option is an end in its entirety as it leads to certain death (Dees et al., 2012). Additionally, the Christian option demonstrates a commitment to live and upholds the biblical teaching that individuals should not engage in murder, while the euthanasia option appears to underscore the principle of making independent decisions even in situations where making such decisions infringe on the Christian worldview that God is sovereign over life and death (Sullivan, 2005).
Conclusion
From the discussion and analysis, it is evident that some of the bases for positions normally taken on the topic of euthanasia are not sufficient and that a new foundation needs to be developed. Most of the cases involving euthanasia are often evaluated based on the principle of autonomy, which gives individuals the right to make their own independent decisions. However, as demonstrated in this paper, some Christian worldview commitments (e.g., sanctity of life, respect for human dignity, God’s sovereignty over life and death, Christ’s compassion, etc) should provide a new foundation for grounding morally and/or ethically justified decisions on euthanasia.
References
Dees, M.K., Vernooij-Dassen, M.J., Dekkers, W.J., Elwyn, G., Vissers, K.C., & Van Weel, C. (2012). Perspectives of decision-making in requests for euthanasia: A qualitative research among patients, relatives and treating physicians in the Netherlands. Palliative Medicine, 27(1), 27-37.
Delkeskamp-Hayes, C. (2003). Euthanasia, physician assisted suicide, and Christianity’s positive relationship to the world. Christian Bioethics: Non-Ecumenical Studies in Medical Morality, 9(2/3), 163-185.
Dennis, D. (2009). Living, dying, grieving. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
Engelhardt, H.T., & Smith, I.A. (2005). End-of-life: The traditional Christian view. Lancet, 366(9490), 1045-1049.
Harding, S.R., & Patrick, J. (1995). Euthanasia: Principles and observations from a Christian perspective. Web.
Sullivan, D.M. (2005). Euthanasia versus letting die: Christian decision-making in terminal patients. Ethics and Medicine, 21(2), 109-118.