Euthanasia Religion and Gender
Abstract
The debate about Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide came up in the 1970s upon many cases of terminally ill patients who were going through tremendous suffering. However, the discussion was opposed by religious leaders and some conservative who hold the sanctity of life in high regard. In this regard, this paper will explore the various attitudes towards the practice through the hypothesis that Euthanasia is the proper way of an individual who is suffering from critical illness to die with dignity. The research used qualitative methods to gather data that included the use of a questionnaire.
Introduction
The mention of Euthanasia brings up ideas of emotions within the general population with people trying to differentiate murder and compassionate assistance to die. In the religious realm, Euthanasia is mostly viewed as murder as they see the mercy offered by the doctor and not a self-chosen right to pass on. In the 1950s, Euthanasia was generally considered murder, and the debate started in the 1970s when the doctors become more open to the patients about their conditions, which saw the introduction of the practice, which is widely practiced today. Besides, the developments in which countries such as the Netherlands proceeded was the decriminalization of the method by the courts through an act that came into effect in 20002 (Attell 355). The action is grounded in the view that Euthanasia is a mercy practice that, under strict regulations, be offered by qualified doctors in case of a medically diagnosed hopeless and unbearable circumstances of a patient. However, a different view emerged about Euthanasia that was grounded in the self-determination of the older adults, which also entered into a debate with one perceptive arguing that Euthanasia should only be done to people who are older than 75 years in a proposal referred to as the Drion’s pill. The view was also held by some religious groups who preferred the abolishment of the practice altogether as they considered it as a human rights issue.
Statement of problem/issue
A proposal by the majority in Dutch supplemented euthanasia legislation. It was grounded on autonomy that would legalize the practice for older adults with a persistent death wish that was not stemming from a medical condition. The shift the view on the euthanasia practice in many states public health as well as the criminal justice debates tend to reflect how the authority over death has shifted from the religions realms towards the medical professionals and towards the dying individuals themselves (Sharp 72). Although religious organizations have lost their say and authority in regards to death, studies indicate that the association between religious practices and attitudes towards Euthanasia for older adults remains. For instance, the older adults who were brought up in a religious society usually hold on the existential perspective. In this regard, it is essential to understand the perspective of older adults and what that means to the practice. Besides, the view of Euthanasia varies among genders, with the females being more empathetic and hence prefer the individuals to die in natural ways than through an induced means as compared to the men who prefer Euthanasia. Besides, the attitudes of the older adults as well as the genders towards Euthanasia and the extent to which this influences the religious practices and beliefs remain a contingent issue in modern society.
Hypothesis
- Euthanasia increases the likelihood that people will die with dignity
- Religion has not yet accepted Euthanasia for the terminally ill patients who are suffering from chronic pain
- Children with a terminal illness with ages that range from six months and the range of 15 to 17 should not be allowed to do Euthanasia
Review of literature
Euthanasia is dying with dignity
Euthanasia has been a controversial topic in many jurisdictions, especially between the religious groups and the medical practitioners as people are toned between ethical values and legal aspects of the practice. According to Fortuin and Pauline, Euthanasia increases the likelihood of people dying with dignity, although stringent guidelines should be formulated to the method, especially in countries where it is legalized (167). Besides, regulation of death tourism, as well as other activities such as consultation with psychiatrists, mandatory reporting of euthanasia cases, obtaining the second opinion, and the improvement of hospice care, should be considered before Euthanasia is carried out. Although Euthanasia is a concept or practice meant to ease pain and suffering to individuals who are going to die anyway, it is not guaranteed that it is the best option and likelihood that people will die with dignity (Attell 358). According to religious people, dying with dignity involves people confession to their sins and dying off naturally without inducement form third parties. Hence, the practice of Euthanasia is close to murder according to the religious faithful. Therefore, for people to die with dignity, consent that is free from any cohesion is a must such that the patient should give voluntary consent. In other cases, non-voluntary consent is permitted when the patient is not responsive, and that is where the issue arises between ethics and legality.
Religion and Euthanasia
Death is usually a very religious thing as different religions deal with it differently. Still, most of them concur that it is the voluntary elevation of a human being in the form of spirit into the heavens. Every religion has its meaning to death and the process of dying as someplace the process as being beyond the reach of man and human experience. According to Fortuin and Pauline, those who are left behind after someone dies should provide the necessary rituals that mark the death of the individual, and that may occur through prayers and ceremonies to remember the moment of death. Hence, religion offers social comfort for those people facing death and allows it to happen naturally (189). Besides, the understanding of dying from a religious perspective is critical in defining the meaning of life. In this regard, most religions disapprove of Euthanasia, with some forbidding it. For instance, the Roman Catholic Church is one of the most active religions that oppose Euthanasia. Generally, all religions observe that those who become vulnerable through illness or disability deserve special care and protection, such that through proper care one can end the life journey in a dignified way. Therefore, religions have held to their notion and not allow Euthanasia and have preserved that human life is unique and should be preserved up to the last minute.
Euthanasia and Pediatrics
Voluntary Euthanasia for adults at their request has been legalized in many countries such as Netherlands and Belgium. However, in some jurisdictions such as the US, Euthanasia, either voluntary or non-voluntary, remains an illegal practice. Although some nations have legalized physician-assisted suicide for adults, there is an opposing opinion when it comes to Euthanasia for minors. In this regard, opponents of euthanasia claim that legalizing such a practice for competent adults leads to Euthanasia for patients without consent, such as children of which it will be amounting to murder of innocent people. In other countries such as Belgium, the acceptance of the practice in adults has been followed by approval of the method for children. In this case, many people are seeing the practice as ethically correct as it places proper safeguards as access should not be limited by age. Also, children of 12 years of age and more are presumed to have the appropriate mindset to legally request Euthanasia under the Euthanasia Law of 2002 in the Netherlands (Sharp 79). In such a case, the requests usually come from patients experiencing unbearable suffering with no prospect of improvement and must be made in earnest and full conviction. Therefore, although the pract9ice is allowed for adults in some jurisdictions, it is prohibited for children unless they are 12years of age and above as it is presumed that they are of legal age to make such a decision with the doctor’s advice.
Methods
The research utilized a qualitative methodology as part of the research project that evaluated the hypothesis on death, religion, and attitude about Euthanasia. The sample population based on 144 participants who included 100 females, 42 males, and 2 others. This study comprised a survey of the participants and gathering there demographic information including age, gender, religion, and in particular, their religiosity degree and their level of education. The major questions asked included whether Euthanasia increases the likelihood that people will die with dignity, whether religion has accepted Euthanasia for the terminally ill patients who are suffering from chronic pain, and whether children with a terminal illness with ages that range from six months and the range of 15 to 17 should be allowed to do Euthanasia. All participants were given the option to participate in the survey with the inclusion-exclusion techniques being used to select the participants. The tools used in the study comprised survey questionnaires as well as computer bubble sheets that were used to record the information. In the analysis, the Chi-test was utilized against the different variables in the questions such as age and religion. Further, the results were entered into a statistical program and presented with the aid of charts and figures.
Findings
The survey showed that there was a significant relationship regarding gender, age, and religiosity in regards to their perception and attitude towards Euthanasia. The finding was expected given that the hypotheses illustrated a difference in opinion between women and men as well as the young and the older people. From the results in table 1, 14% of the females and 14.29% of the males strongly agreed that Euthanasia allows adults to die with dignity while 15% of the females and 11.9% of the males strongly disagreeing with the notion. Besides, the survey showed that older people were less likely to agree to the euthanasia practice than the younger generation. Moreover, it was found that religious people have not yet accepted Euthanasia for terminally ill patients who are suffering from chronic pain as they consider it murder. However, there were varying views of whether children with a terminal illness with ages that range from six months and as well as of 15 to 17, should be allowed to do Euthanasia. In this regard, some participants argued that such children have not reached the age of consent and hence they were not in a position to determine their fate in regards to death. Also, it was found that people with increased educational levels agreed more with the euthanasia practice than those with less education as social constraints were the most significant contributor to rejection of Euthanasia, as in graph 1and table 2.
Table 1: Attitudes towards Euthanasia by gender
Graph 1: Common constraints for Euthanasia
Table 2: Factors influencing the choice of Euthanasia
Discussion and Conclusions
The study suggests further research on this subject, especially the survey in areas of more liberal vs. more conservative views of the population. Health practitioners are usually faced with a dilemma in their career when they have to choose between their own beliefs about Euthanasia and their responsibility. Every person, sick or well have their own ideas and feelings about the subject based on their position and stand in society as those who are religious view it as murder while those with scholarly knowledge see it as not only a way of relieving people from there suffering but also an economical means of ending an individual’s life (Battin 33). The society today is struggling with the legal as well as moral issues in regards to the physician-assisted death. In this regard, as the global life expectancy reduces every year with the onset of various diseases, more people are coming in terms with the practice not only for themselves but also for their loved ones. From the findings, it is evident that religious groups are still opposed to the method as they hold that an individual should be allowed to die naturally on their own. However, the medical personal as well as some liberals hold that, when an individual is brain dead and cannot be resuscitated again, it is prudent and healthy to end their lives. Therefore, as society grapples with the acceptance of Euthanasia, it remains a legal form of physician induced suicide in many nations and should be embraced both as a social and economical remedy to the family and the individual.