More on the Relevance of Personhood and Mindedness: The Euthanasia Debate
In my first paper for SHERM, I argued that "fetus personhood" is irrelevant to the abortion debate. In this paper, I will argue that personhood is irrelevant to the euthanasia debate as well. Even though a terminally ill patient is a person, ending their life can still be moral. Because pe...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Wipf and Stock Publishers
2023
|
| In: |
Socio-historical examination of religion and ministry
Year: 2023, Volume: 5, Issue: 1, Pages: 30-42 |
| Further subjects: | B
Active Euthanasia
B Abstract (summary) B Daniel Callahan B Don Marquis B Intrinsic Value of Life B terms and conditions B privacy policy B Euthanasia |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | In my first paper for SHERM, I argued that "fetus personhood" is irrelevant to the abortion debate. In this paper, I will argue that personhood is irrelevant to the euthanasia debate as well. Even though a terminally ill patient is a person, ending their life can still be moral. Because personhood (and mindedness) is only instrumentally valuable as means to attaining the good life, if a terminal illness has now made that impossible, it is permissible (when both the doctor and patient agree) for the doctor to help the patient end their life. Thus, euthanasia should be legal. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2637-7500 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Socio-historical examination of religion and ministry
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.33929/sherm.2023.vol5.no1.02 |