The application of a moral theory in concrete ethical problems requires one to assess the relative significance of different principles in the situation. Various moral approaches such as casuistry derive ethical culpabilities and provide steps that can be used in moral development. Others emerge from different beliefs and religions such as dharma, Hellenism, and Buddhism. Casuistry is mainly utilized in concrete ethical cases. This essay will depict the use of casuistry in developing the moral dilemma surrounding euthanasia or mercy killing.
Andrew’s wife, Casey has been battling cancer for almost two years now. The couple found out about the illness when it was too late for the doctors to pursue any treatment mechanisms. The physicians had told her that she had less than one year to live but so far through the life support machine in the hospital, she has survived for two years of unbearable pain and sadness from being constricted to a bed every day. On several accounts, Casey has asked the doctors and her husband to let her die in peace rather than keeping her dependent on the machine.
If the health specialists or husband agree to Casey’s wish, they will commit an act called mercy killing or euthanasia. The aspect is not considered ethical in various countries with the church strongly advocating against the practice (Fletcher, 2015). However, considering the pain, suffering, and helplessness that Casey faces, it seems like the appropriate thing to do to give her rest. The query thus is should the doctors or the husband end Casey’s life to give her a well-deserved rest at the expense of committing a felony? The hierarchical ordering and relative importance of the two principles should be assessed to develop the issues that are at stake and solve them in the best way possible.
Reference
Fletcher, J. F. (2015). Morals and Medicine: the moral problems of the patient's right to know the truth, contraception, artificial insemination, sterilization, euthanasia. New York: Princeton University Press.
