Untitled document.edited (55)
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
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
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.