When Self-Determination Runs Amok

Abstract

The euthanasia debate is not just another moral debate, one in a long\nlist of arguments in our pluralistic society. It is profoundly emblematic of\nthree important turning points in Western thought. The first is that of the\nlegitimate conditions under which one person can kill another....The second\nturning point lies in the meaning and limits of self-determination....The\nthird turning point is to be found in the claim being made upon medicine: it\nshould be prepared to make its skills available to individuals to help them\nachieve their private vision of the good life....I believe that, at each of\nthese three turning points, proponents of euthanasia push us in the wrong\ndirection. Arguments in favor of euthanasia fall into four general\ncategories, which I will take up in turn: (1) the moral claim of individual\nself-determination and well-being; (2) the moral irrelevance of the difference\nbetween killing and allowing to die; (3) the supposed paucity of evidence to\nshow likely harmful consequences of legalized euthanasia; and (4) the\ncompatibility of euthanasia and medical practice.