Euthanasia and the Doctrine of Double Effect

Euthanasia is the act of intentionally ending one’s life to ease suffering and pain (Rachels, 2017). Countries like Belgium, the Netherlands, and Colombia have legalized human euthanasia. Euthanasia is categorized into two forms, passive and active euthanasia. Active euthanasia is where a person causes the patient’s death deliberately by acts such as drug overdose. Passive euthanasia, on the other hand, is where one does not directly take the patient life but instead leaves them to die by withdrawing or withholding a treatment (Rachels, 2017).

The doctrine of double effect suggests that if one performs a good act, but the outcome is bad, it is ethically okay to perform (Harrison, 2010).  It is used in justifying a situation where a medical provider prescribes drugs to a patient to relieve painful symptoms while aware that performing it will shorten the life of the patient. The healthcare provider does not directly aim at reducing the patient’s life; it’s just the outcome of the good intention of lowering the pain a patient feels (Marquis, 2013).

WE’VE HAD A GOOD SUCCESS RATE ON THIS ASSIGNMENT. PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH PapersSpot AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT

There are factors involved so that the doctrine of double effect can be applied. First is that the good outcome should be achieved independently. For example, if the only way the drug is going to ease the patient’s pain is by ending their life then the principle will not apply. Secondly, the act should be relative to the cause (Marquis, 2013). The principle will not apply if one prescribes a large dose that will kill and far from controlling the pain of the patient. Lastly is that the patient should be terminally ill. One should not give a large dose of pain-relieving drugs to a patient who can easily recover from their injury or disease without the drugs (Harrison, 2010). 

However, some philosophers think that double effect is irrelevant because all healthcare providers should be responsible for the expected outcomes of their actions.  According to them, it can also produce an unanticipated moral result.  If people think that quick death is better than slower death, then the medical professional who aims to kill the patient will be seen more morally superior than the one whose intention is relieving the pain (Harrison, 2010). 

References

Harrison, T. (2010). The Legal Position of the Doctrine of Double Effect in End of Life Decision Making

Marquis, D. (2013). The doctrine of Double Effect. International Encyclopedia of Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444367072.wbiee481

Rachels, J. (2017). Active and Passive Euthanasia. Applied Ethics, 423-427. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315097176-62