Untitled document.edited (55)

docx

School

University of Notre Dame *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

88

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Nov 24, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

5

Uploaded by DukeBoulderScorpion20

Report
Introduction Voluntary assisted dying in Victoria was legalized in 2017 and remains a burning issue for discussion about ethics, morality, and law of such a crucial decision at the end of life. The legislation passed against the backdrop of previous federal prohibitions, striking between personal liberty and moral values. This paper critically analyses the Voluntary Assisted Dying Act 2017 and exposes the fundamental eligibility criteria of the Act. This analysis looks at how liberal principles and regulation of morality come together to influence this jurisprudence despite the arguments on the right to choose and sanctity of life, or slippery slopes as they are known. The thesis of this journey through such complex aspects is that the legalization of voluntary assisted dying in Victoria represents a sophisticated balancing act between individual rights, social morality, and evolving health care, requiring critical analysis of its ethical foundations. Legislative framework in Victoria Voluntary assisted dying in Victoria is highly legislated by the Voluntary Assisted Dying Act 2017. This is one of the most significant pieces of legislation to date that highlights tough admission terms. It is a mandatory requirement that a person must be legally sane and should have the ability to make independent choices without any pressure or influence. The Act not only defines the conditions through which one can access assisted dying but also establishes a rigorous procedure involving medical coordination, consultation, assessment, opinion, declaration, and consent among others. Importantly, even physicians are entitled to exercise conscientiously the right of refusal, illustrating an intricate equilibrium between the freedom of choice and medical prerogative. However, Victoria's approach to legislation is extremely mindful of ethical concerns. Thus, this framework attempts to provide legal access to persons suffering from terminal illnesses and at the same time ensures that necessary safeguards have been taken and the highest standards of medical and ethical practices applied. Arguments for legalization Arguments of personal autonomy, relief from excruciating pain, and the adoption of 'patient- centered' treatment for dying patients all favor the legalization of voluntary assisted dying in Victoria. 1 . Individual Autonomy and Rights Supporters argue that there should be a legal right to die with dignity for people who are terminally ill, emphasizing that the notion of assisted dying recognizes individual autonomy and freedom. 2 . Relief from Suffering Many people believe that it is a humane way of dealing with incurable pain and diseases. Allowing people to take their lives as an option to escape suffering and agony in their dying days by giving them the right to die with dignity. 3. Patient-Centered Care
The move to legalization represents a gradual shift toward a model of patient choice that allows people to be informed participants in end-of-life care. This law corresponds to modern healthcare values that are centered on individual goals and aspirations. 4 . Mitigation of Undue Medicalization Legalized assisted dying provides an alternative to the use of aggressive and possibly futile medical intervention which may serve to spare the patient needless and hard suffering at death's door. It reflects current healthcare trends focusing on quality of life and their right to refuse medical treatment that is inconsistent with their values. 5. Transparency and Regulation Legalization entails the development of a framework that prescribes the necessary age limit for those eligible, mandatory health evaluations, and reporting mechanisms. This would ensure that there is transparency and accountability to prevent any abuse and possible pitfalls and balance the interests of society and that of each individual. In brief, key reasons for legalizing voluntary assisted dying in Victoria revolve around individual autonomy, human compassion in cases of unbearable suffering, patient-focused care, de- medicalization, and regulation for ethical and transparent practices. Arguments against legalization The opponents of the voluntary assisted dying law in Victoria raise valid questions based on respect for life, potential sliding slopes, and the ethics of medicine. 1. Sanctity of Life This argument is the premise of one point against legalization, which asserts that morals and religion forbid it to end one's life on purpose, even when the sick person wishes it. However, critics contend that life itself is invaluable and that assisted dying devalues this underlying principle by permitting people to accelerate their demise prematurely. 2. Slippery Slope Concerns There is widespread skepticism that there will be the possibility of a slippery slope whereby the definition of what constitutes assisted dying will become wider than anticipated. The opponents are scared that after it gets legalized, the practice will extend to those who are not in the initial criteria and this will bring about unforeseen consequences thus reducing the sanctity of life. 3 . Medical Professional Ethics Additionally, a key argument against legalization stems from traditional medical ethics that focuses on the most important objective of saving lives. Supporters of this debate claim that making assisted dying easy is unethical compared to the medical profession's traditional principles, wherein doctors focus on saving lives and relieving pain and never deliberately causing death.
4 . Palliative Care as an Alternative According to opponents, patients should be offered better palliative care as an alternative to assisted death. They have argued that the provision of holistic palliative care is more effective at addressing the physical, emotional, as well as psychic needs of terminally ill people to end pain at the end of life rather than the use of assisted dying. 5 . Ethical and Moral Dilemmas Opponents go beyond religious and philosophical considerations by highlighting the numerous complex ethical dilemmas associated with medically assisted dying. However, a major ethical consideration on this issue involves the possibility of coercion, manipulation, or undue influence by others in allowing people to make irrevocable choices in states of vulnerability. Finally, the arguments for voluntary assisted dying in Victoria are based upon principles such as individual autonomy, compassion, patient-centered care, undue medicalization, and orderly regulation. Liberalism and assisted dying The liberal outlook on physician-assisted death in Victoria focuses on personal independence and freedom to determine one's life course. In liberal thought, it is believed that there are inborn rights of people to freedom, self-rule, and self-ownership. Liberals view assisted suicides for terminally ill patients as an extension of the individual's right to life in a liberal society that respects people's free will. Nevertheless, the liberal view gives rise to questions of whether the state should be involved in decision-making that is so personal. Liberals support individual autonomy while recognizing the need for a balance between personal freedom and societal interests and ethics. These questions surround the limits of state involvement in matters of life and death, and what regulatory framework can be established that protects individual freedom without abuse. The liberal view of assisted dying in Victoria illustrates this tension of how an individual's autonomy must be balanced with the ethical obligations of the government. Legal regulation of morality The legal regulation of morality in the context of assisted dying in Victoria involves the intricate interplay between ethical values and legislative constraints. This concept delves into the question of whether the law should dictate or reflect societal morals. The case of assisted dying requires careful consideration of how the legal framework aligns with or challenges prevailing moral norms, including beliefs about the sanctity of life, individual autonomy, and the role of the state in shaping ethical choices. The legal regulation of morality thus navigates the complex terrain of finding a balance between societal values and individual rights within the confines of the law. Applying the 'No Harm' Principle
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Applying the 'No Harm' Principle to voluntary assisted dying in Victoria involves assessing whether legalization minimizes harm. Proponents argue that offering this option reduces suffering for terminally ill individuals. Critics, however, contend that potential harms, such as the devaluation of life or unintended consequences, must be carefully considered. Evaluating the 'No Harm' Principle requires a nuanced examination of the overall impact, ensuring that the benefits of legalizing assisted dying outweigh potential negative effects and that adequate safeguards are in place to prevent harm to individuals and society. Utilitarianism vs. Deontological Approach to Rights The ethical evaluation of voluntary assisted dying in Victoria involves contrasting utilitarianism and deontological ethics, two fundamental philosophical approaches. Utilitarianism, guided by the principle of maximizing overall happiness, may support legalization if it alleviates the profound suffering of individuals confronting terminal illnesses. Advocates contend that the reduction of pain and the empowerment of individuals to control the timing and manner of their death contribute to a net increase in well-being. Conversely, a deontological approach, rooted in inherent principles and duties, raises concerns about intentionally causing death, challenging the sanctity of life. Opponents argue that even with potential positive consequences, violating absolute moral principles remains ethically objectionable. Balancing these perspectives is essential for ethical policymaking. Utilitarians emphasize the potential for a society with reduced suffering, while deontologists prioritize upholding moral duties regardless of consequences. Striking a balance involves careful consideration of individual autonomy, societal values, and the moral duties inherent in these divergent philosophical perspectives. In navigating this ethical terrain, policymakers must weigh the potential happiness derived from relieving suffering against the duty to preserve life. Crafting legislation that respects individual rights while upholding broader ethical norms ensures a nuanced and ethical approach to voluntary assisted dying in Victoria. conclusion in conclusion, the legalization of voluntary assisted dying in Victoria unveils a complex ethical landscape, encapsulating diverse philosophical perspectives. The utilitarian argument, focused on minimizing suffering and maximizing overall happiness, contends that legalization aligns with compassionate and patient-centered care. Conversely, deontological ethics, anchored in absolute moral principles, questions the intentional hastening of death, emphasizing the sanctity of life. Balancing these contrasting perspectives in legislation requires a nuanced understanding of individual autonomy, societal values, and moral duties. Crafting a legal framework that respects personal freedoms while safeguarding against potential harms necessitates careful consideration of the broader ethical implications. The discourse surrounding voluntary assisted dying underscores the intricate interplay between individual rights, societal responsibilities, and the ethical imperatives that shape end-of-life decisions. Ultimately, the ongoing conversation strives
to achieve a harmonious equilibrium that upholds both the autonomy of individuals and the enduring ethical principles that guide the intricate terrain of voluntary assisted dying in Victoria.