Euthanasia: A moral but hard choice or

inherently morally bankrupt?

Nathan Marcus
Dr. Jyoti Prakash Pujari
SDEC212: Expressive Skills
February 14, 2022
 Marcus 1

TOPIC

Project Report

Submitted for Expressive Skills

PROGRAMME NAME

Expressive skills: BSc Economics

Submitted by Project Guide

21213032 Nathan Marcus Dr. Jyoti Prakash Pujari

Department of Economics
School of Humanities and Social Sciences

CHRIST (Deemed to be University)

DELHI NCR, INDIA
 Marcus 2

Table of Contents

Introduction..............................................................................................3
Body........................................................................................................4
The first opposition to Euthanasia..................................................................4
Practice later on......................................................................................4
Current Scope.........................................................................................5
Conclusion................................................................................................6
Bibliography..............................................................................................7
 Marcus 3

Introduction

'Euthanasia' is a compound of two Greek words - eu and thanatos meaning, literally, 'a

good death'. Today, 'euthanasia' is generally understood to mean the bringing about of a good

death - 'mercy killing,' where one person, A, ends the life of another person, B, where B may
1
or may not have given consent for the same. The practice has existed for a long time and

dates back to Ancient Greece and Rome. Hemlock was one such element used as a means of

hastening death on the island of Kea in Greece. Euthanasia, in the sense of the deliberate

hastening of a person's death, was supported by Socrates, Plato, and Seneca the Elder in the

ancient world. 2 Today’s world has raised an important debate on the question. Is the question

of Euthanasia one that speaks about the right to death (as opposed to the right to life) of an

individual or is it one that is morally flawed?

1
Helga Kuhse, “Euthanasia Fact Sheet,” Euthanasia Fact Sheet | The World Federation of Right to
Die Societies (The World Federation of Right to Die Societies, July 1992), 40.
2
Kyriaki Mystakidou et al., “The Evolution of Euthanasia and Its Perceptions in Greek Culture and
Civilization,” Perspectives in Biology and Medicine (Johns Hopkins University Press, January 25,
2005),
 Marcus 4

Body

The first opposition to Euthanasia

As mentioned earlier, in ancient Greek or Roman society Euthanasia was a common

and socially acceptable practice. Despite alleged opposition from personalities such as

Hippocrates (the father of modern medicine interestingly), the practice was continued.

Socrates too had committed Euthanasia after he was to be exiled by the state of Athens. The

first major set of laws and social norms which opposed the concept of Euthanasia came about

after the spread of Christianity and Judeo-Christian ideals during the early modern period.

The Church, holding massive influence enforced the idea of life being divine and a gift of

god to be cherished, thus curbing the use of Euthanasia. 3 Their ideals also continued further

when modern ethno-states and Empires began to grow in Europe and began to feature in the

official laws of the land.

Practice later on

The age of Enlightenment saw drastic changes in the viewpoint towards the concept

of Euthanasia, with Thomas Moore advocating the practice in an ideal world. 4 Despite the

growth of support for Euthanasia, the first active movement would not arrive until the mid-

1800s. Debates around the issue had begun to grow around circles in Britain and the United

States. In January 1936, King George V was given a fatal dose of morphine and cocaine to

hasten his death. While this event was kept a secret for over 50 years, the death of George V

coincided with proposed legislation in the House of Lords to legalise euthanasia in the

country. 5 The Nazis of Germany too had strongly advocated for Euthanasia which was often

3
“How to Vote Catholic,” CatholiCity.com (The Mary Foundation), accessed February 14, 2022.
4
Michael Stolberg, “Active Euthanasia in Pre-Modern Society, 1500–1800: Learned Debates and
Popular Practices,” Academic.oup.com (Social History of Medicine, August 2007), 205–221.
5
J H Rolland Ramsay, “A King, a Doctor, and a Convenient Death,” BMJ (Clinical research ed.) (BMJ
Group, May 28, 1994), 308.
 Marcus 5

forced in nature with over 300,000 killed in a state-sponsored campaign for cleaning up of

“undesirable elements” of society.6

Current Scope

With the debate rising, it might be good o look up the facts. Euthanasia is much more

complex than just a single word. It has various types and various legal statuses from region to

region. Clearly, the act committed by King George V is not the same as what was done by the

Nazis despite both happening within a decade of each other and in the same continent. The

acts committed can be brought under a common banner of euthanasia but this umbrella term

can be broken down further. Euthanasia can broadly be classified under three major types

with two further sub-divisions each.7

1) Voluntary – when a person consents to have their life ended on their own accord

(Increasing Legality)

2) Non-Voluntary – when a patient's consent is unavailable and another person

makes the decision for them. (Restricted Legality)

3) Involuntary - when consent is not obtained or is committed against the patient's

will. (No Legal Status)

I. Passive euthanasia – when there is no external act committed to taking a life

II. Active euthanasia – when there is an external act done to facilitate to take a life

Conclusion

6
Irene Zoech, “Named: The Baby Boy Who Was Nazis' First Euthanasia Victim,” The Telegraph
(Telegraph Media Group, October 12, 2003).
7
“Ethics - Euthanasia: Voluntary and Involuntary Euthanasia,” BBC (BBC), accessed February 14,
2022.
 Marcus 6

The question is not just a single one, but rather a multi-layered one. Off the boat, it

should be easy and obvious to say that Involuntary Euthanasia (similar to what the Nazis had

done) is outright murder and must be treated as such. Voluntary Euthanasia is perhaps the

easiest form to morally argue for and successfully implement. The only possible opposition to

this is morality stemming from religion and its emphasis on life being a “gift of God”. Once a

gift is given, however, the giver has no business on how the receiver decides to use it. A

person is the only one who has the right to determine whether their current state has reduced

them to what they would consider beneath human living. They should be able to choose if

they wish to continue their mortal existence. Non-voluntary Euthanasia is a more grey area

than the other two. It is impossible to accurately ascertain accurately what the person would

choose if they could do so. Gifting someone else the power over another being is problematic

in multiple ways and that would make a valid argument against it. However, choosing to not

act when a person is suffering and unable to help themselves is like walking past someone on

fire and that is also something difficult to swallow for one’s conscience. This form needs to

be further debated and deliberated and even if made legal should be highly supervised and

restricted.

The questions of Active and Passive Euthanasia are irrelevant as these are just

conduits to achieve the above-mentioned goals. Neither of them is morally questionable and

is fairly interchangeable depending upon the circumstances.

Bibliography
 Marcus 7

“Ethics - Euthanasia: Voluntary and Involuntary Euthanasia.” BBC. BBC. Accessed February

14, 2022. https://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/euthanasia/overview/volinvol.shtml.

“How to Vote Catholic.” CatholiCity.com. The Mary Foundation. Accessed February 14,

2022. https://www.catholicity.com/vote/euthanasia.html.

Kuhse, Helga. 1992. “Euthanasia Fact Sheet.” The World Federation of Right to Die

Societies. https://web.archive.org/web/20170805150346/http://www.worldrtd.net/

euthanasia-fact-sheet.

Mystakidou, Kyriaki, Efi Parpa, Eleni Tsilika, Emmanuela Katsouda, and Lambros Vlahos.

"The Evolution of Euthanasia and Its Perceptions in Greek Culture and Civilization."

Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 48, no. 1 (2005): 95-104.

doi:10.1353/pbm.2005.0013.

Ramsay, J H Rolland. “A King, a Doctor, and a Convenient Death.” BMJ (Clinical research

ed.). BMJ Group, May 28, 1994.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2540387/.

Stolberg, Michael. “Active Euthanasia in Pre-Modern Society, 1500–1800: Learned Debates

and Popular Practices.” Academic.oup.com. Social History of Medicine, August

2007. https://academic.oup.com/shm/article-abstract/20/2/205/1636063?

redirectedFrom=fulltext&login=false.

Zoech, Irene. “Named: The Baby Boy Who Was Nazis' First Euthanasia Victim.” The

Telegraph. Telegraph Media Group, October 12, 2003.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/1443967/Named-the-

baby-boy-who-was-Nazis-first-euthanasia-victim.html.