Biblical Model and Principles of Medical Ethics on Euthanasia - Term Paper Example

Biblical Model and Principles for Medical Ethics Concerning Euthanasia Name Course Name Date Introduction The faith and believe of Christians is wholly founded in Word of God. The bible is regarded to have divine inspiration, has the final authority and has unending integrity. The Christian medical ethics is ethics guided by the word of God rather by the Holy Scripture. The word of God provides the human beings with the necessary guiding principles that help us to make ethical judgment. It is also believed that norms and morals not taught in the scriptures can be founded from the principles that are found within it. The Holy Spirit coupled with the teachings of Christian tradition is the core driver of our ethics and morality. Euthanasia in simple terms is physician assisted suicide. In some countries Euthanasia is legally acceptable. Ethics and morality is universal and taking or helping one to take his/her life is not morally acceptable. In order to have an in depth understanding of this subject matter, this paper will discuss how various skills are employed in moral reasoning. In this regard, various steps as outlined by different moral reasoning theories will be well articulated. The paper will also describe different sources of moral knowledge giving the strengths and weakness of each source and how they can be harmonized in order to come with an informed moral norm. To lace it up, we will appreciate and intensively discuss the meaning of Christian conscience. The application of Christian conscience in making a decision of what we ought to do in the now circumstances. Skills in moral reasoning Moral theologians have conducted intensive studies to determine the relationship between Christian faith and ethics. The different perspectives and understandings that have been established with regard to revelation and reason has raised heated debates in the recent past. In order to fully have an inherent comprehension of reason, the link between ethics, revelation and reason must be well defined. The pioneer of Enlightenment philosophy argued that ethics is as a result of human reason and freedom to do so.1 For instance, morality should be anchored on the recognition and understanding of the moral law. In the same respect, humans because of their freedom and reason, they have value. Christians believe that Christianity is an essential component of ethics and thus morality. In essence, Christianity has a unique and very important ingredient to the moral beliefs and commitments of human beings.2 Religion has immensely contributed to morality because ethics in human history and cultures is strongly linked with religious traditions and consequently it is through religious practices and traditions that human ethics and morality have been nurtured3. However, it is also prudent to note that people can be moral without necessarily being religious. For instance, through reason people can discern good without being attached to a specific religion. Human beings have the capacity to recognize the value and dignity of others and thereby showing them love, do what is just to them and thus commit themselves to high standards of morality.4 In accordance with the above argument, religion cannot be the sole contributor to morality as people can be ethical without being religious. Similarly, the enormous testimonies of religious experiences in human history have plaid a huge role in instilling and nurturing morality. The Euthyphro dilemma is Plato’s classical dialogue that also tries to expound on this subject.5 According to Euthyphro, there are two questions that distinctively stand out; “is something good or right because it is commanded by God? Or is it commanded by God because is good?” with respect to this dilemma, taking the first part of it, it simply implies that anything made good or right is always as a result of divine authority.6 The second part of the dilemma basically means that things are themselves right and good because of God’s command. These interpretations leave us with many questions unanswered, for instance, does it mean that certain vices are made good because of the divine command? Or is there any need for God’s command, rather does religious traditions have something to add to morality? Diffusing the confusion brought about by the above reasoning, there are several theories that have been formulated to aid in moral reasoning.7 They provide skills and guide posts that a medical physician should use for him or her to reason morally particularly with regard to euthanasia. These theories are: the divine command theory, the harmony of creation and revelation, transcendental or fundamental freedom, and the fundamental option and ‘grave matter’ and light matter’. The divine command theory, directs human beings to follow moral commands because they represent and express Godliness which is revealed to human beings through the commandments of the religious traditions. For instance, the divine command like ‘Thou shall not kill’ implies that people should not kill one another because it is the will of God and thus they must obey that command.8 Following this explanation medical physicians are obliged to protect life not to take life. The divine command demands that human beings should be able to distinguish between what the will of God is and what is not. In order to discern the will of God, human beings are obliged to use their reason to differentiate between Godly commands and devilish or wicked commands9. Furthermore, the divine theory posits that commands recognized through reason to be right, always are from God and wicked ones are not. Using the divine command theory, medical physicians should reason and know that euthanasia is a sin and morally unacceptable. However, one can tell that human reason act independently thus can automatically differentiate between good and evil.10 Expounding on this further, it therefore means that, if medical physicians can reason to distinguish good and evil, then, there is no need to refer to the divine command. Harmonizing creation and revelation; this theory is superior to divine command basically because God’s will is not emphasized in isolation but rather God is the creator of everything.11 For this reason, there is enough evidence that absolute goodness is found in all that God created. This theory explains that, reason is a gift from God. For instance, God is the foundation of everything and it is through this that an individual can be ethically upright without necessarily being religious or believing in God.12 The theory argues that without question, creation shows explicitly the goodness of God, it has its own kind and coherence and thus people do appreciate its relevance and goodness with or without the knowledge of God. This theory also shows us that the onset of religious practices is found in revelation, where people have rare experiences of God thus creating a strong relationship with God’s goodness13. In Revelation God is made the foreground, where He is not only known through the acts of creation but also known of his powerful personal presence. In the same line of argument, through religion Christians experience God as the ‘foreground’ which then supplements the experiences of God as the ‘background’.14 In this regard, human experience of God’s goodness and love basically intensifies what we understand about God’s goodness by reflecting on His appealing works of creation. Consequently, through reason and rational reflection human beings are able to differentiae between what is good or right with that that is wrong or wicked.15 Accordingly, in revelation we are made to understand that human beings are made in the image of God, this compels us to strongly respect human life and always try to do good. Medical physicians should use this particular theory to reason out, that respect for life and thus not encourage or participate in taking human life. Across the world and in different times, places and traditions, individuals have dissimilar understanding about reason and thus we are left to think that ‘reason’ is not universal. This hence leaves us hanging without a clear understanding of what ‘reason’ really is.16 Fundamental Freedom; this is the liberty of human beings to choose what they want to be in relation to God.17 According to the fundamental freedom, people make a decision about their whole selves without being aware as in the same way they can make choices with regard to specific objects. However, they can be conscious of the fundamental freedom. For example, the loving and the doing of God’s will automatically drive people to do what is morally good and right.18 The liberty to decide on specific objects also known as categorical freedom helps individuals to choose between distinct alternatives and thus driving them to act in a specific direction. Fundamental freedom and categorical freedom although distinct, they do depend on each other. In this regard, when choosing a specific object, an individual either modifies, weakens, ratifies, or intensifies the choice of who he is.19 In this regard, medical physicians should reason out and decide what they want to be in the eyes of God. For instance, is he or she wants to be a killer or a life saver? However, it is also argued that, not each and every decision an individual makes is at the same moment representing his/her transcendental freedom. Fundamental option and ‘grave matter’ and ‘light matter’; differentiating the ‘light’ and ‘grave’ matter wholly depends on the objective character of acts; for instance of what good or harm will they do to relationships, the community, and how will they affect other norms.20 As in, what will be the ultimate end or goal of specific individual acts? This then brings us to the mortal and venial sin in terms of the ‘fundamental option’.21 It has been established that people choose who they are with regard to their historical acts. If those historical acts actualized by immensely causing harm, then that is considered to be a ‘grave matter’.22 Contrary to this, people may also choose who they are through their actions that are not ‘grave matter’ but are a rhythm of denial to open up to or accept God’s grace.23 When one commits a sin, it means that he/she has full consent and knowledge of his actions.24 However, if this is true, then we will be rejecting God and thus their would be no any venial sin as it would be that we sin out of choice of who we rally are.25 To quell this, the fundamental option theory argues that not all choices human beings make are informed choices. Killing is a sin, knowing this, euthanasia in itself is a sin and therefore physicians are obliged not to engage in it at any cost. People may act knowingly and out of will, nonetheless, most decisions are not automatically the choices of who we are or want to be.26 Sources of moral knowledge Moral information is basic in guiding people to adhere to particular commitments, actions, attitudes and approaches that are essential in moulding their behaviour. Morality can be termed as the common good for the community and the society at large. The ancient doctrines of natural law foster common good for all and in this regard people living under such laws are entitled to lead a happy life.27 The common good within a given community can be achieved by putting together goods that a vast majority hold and use in common as well as those goods that provide fulfilment of their common needs. Religious teachings particularly Christianity has been on the forefront to advocate for norms that should and must be embraced by individuals within the society in order to have a morally healthy society.28 Additionally, the dynamics of life coupled with daily human activities has also forced individuals to co-relate, work together, interact and collaborate in various aspects of life.29 The interpersonal associations together with their dependencies entail cooperation among the participants and hence there must exist certain moral principles that will anchor these relationships.30 Following this explanation, it is wise to note that there are four sources of moral knowledge, that is, Christian or religious (scripture), reason or reality, experience, and tradition. Christianity or religion as a source of morality: Christians worldwide are obliged to follow the biblical teachings that there is eternal life, and that the way they live in the world will ultimately determine their life after death.31 Christian morality is based on the notion of believing in Jesus Christ. The Christian teachings and authority directs Christians to embrace norms and values that promote the common good within the society. The scripture and in the traditional teachings of the church there is universally acceptable human morality that is taught. The men and women, who are dedicated to believe in Christ, discover and nurture their moral standings.32 Through Christian teachings categorical values, virtues and norms are realized. Accordingly, faithfulness, justice and purity are also revealed and embraced.33 Furthermore, the transcendental attitudes and norms of that are basic to the highest ethical standards of faith and love is also attained.34 The Ten Commandments have constantly been used by Christians to make sure that the followers of the religion lead a moral life.35 Nonetheless, the teachings of the Gospel have a sole objective of nurturing morality among the Christian community. Appreciating and accepting the will of God as the determinant of morality is key in leading a moral life.36 In this essence it is important to acknowledge that morality objective and not subjective, it is beyond human desires.37 Under this, it argued that other sources of moral knowledge only reflects to a certain extent the will of God. The scripture wholly reveals the will God particularly when it is interpreted properly. According to this discussion, physicians can base their moral decision on biblical teachings. For instance, they should not aid or participate in taking the life of another person. The consequences of source is that, one can misunderstand and think that the will of God is his own instead of how it has been explicitly expressed in life. Some people can mistakenly think that the will of God different from a rational argument thus making a mask of command instead of an authentic witness.38 Reason as a source of morality; transcendental freedom guide individuals in discerning the human good and thus God is threshold by which human activities must be judged.39 Human beings must and should constantly evaluate their actions prior to undertaking the real action or making any choice. Reality cannot be avoided at any cost and so is morality. It has been established that moral knowledge is objective following the fact that truth or reality is not dependent on the subject, it demands that we think beyond material objects.40 Reason, as seen from the above discussion, is a gift from God, and hence physicians using this fundamental gift should and must know that killing/euthanasia is immoral. The problem with reason as a source of morality is that some physicians might think that the reasoning is coming up with the most efficient ways of satisfying personal preferences. Experience; from our earlier discussions we found out that human freedom is real, however, it can be well understood in relations to its final outcome of the human. Human freedom is not self imposing nor self-justifying and does not have a sinful end. Human conscience helps in distinguishing the good from the evil in regard to what we want to as at now. True conscience is said to be the will of God. Following this critical evidence, physicians before making any medical decision they must consult their conscience. Euthanasia as explained above is helping another person to commit suicide; this is a grossly immoral act. The down side of experience as the source of moral knowledge is that some people may think that experience is normative despite its link to the society which in most cases challenges one’s own justification.41 Tradition as a source of morality; across different societies, the community mirrors experience, however, it is not just a group of different normative experiences.42 It is worth note that the community provides the threshold over which human beings experience everything. Human behaviour is moulded and nurtured within the community. Different traditions across the world are determined to produce individuals of high moral standards by encouraging the acquisition of norms and criticizing vices.43 The community is said to be the witness of the will of God. Physicians are human beings who come from communities; all communities the world over respect and protect life and this norm is passed over to generation after generation. Similarly, in their medical practice, physicians should embrace respect and protection for life and hence euthanasia should and must not be encouraged at any cost. Christian Conscience While discussing matters of conscience, we should note that it is part and parcel of human beings and cannot be a separate entity. Certainly, conscience is not a program that is permanently incarnated in the human brain; for instance there are various things that we must learn in order to develop our conscience.44 For instance, we learn what we are pertained to do; it is a continuous process that helps individuals to decide on what they ought to do. And lastly, conscience cannot be identified with what we feel, it is beyond human emotions. Christian conscience is wholly founded in the scriptures and it is mainly referred to as our hearts that basically means who we really are as human beings.45 There are several instances in the scripture where we are advised to listen to our hearts, for instance, when listening to our hearts, God will speak to us and compel us to do what is always right or morally good. The hearts in the Christian perspective are also the point of reflection, the centre of moral judgment of our actions and lives. The hearts should not be corrupted for us to remain pure and morally upright.46 The Christian conscience is an unavoidable aid that guides Christians to judge wisely and rightly with regard to both past acts and the courses of their lives together with the moral obligations that are immediately before them.47 In the same line of thinking, conscience obliges Christians to follow the laws of Godliness. Through the New Testament, the Holy Spirit instructs Christians and protects their conscience. Accordingly, the scripture also states that Jesus promised his disciples that he will send them a helper, an advocate and a spirit that will always be reminding them of what he taught.48 Christian ethicists have established that Christian conscience is described in three distinct dimensions, that is, capacity, process, and judgment. The capacity dimension of the conscience is founded on the Christian thirst for and their orientation to that that is good.49 It is the Christians capacity to discern and respond to the moral threshold, for instance, it is the inner drive to become good people and thus creating just communities through the right actions that they take.50 Each and every individual has a unique capacity to respond to morality. Similarly, as people become of age this capacity decreases. We should also note this capacity is both personal and communal.51 Christianity affects the conscience of its followers, for instance reading the scriptures and attending to the biblical teachings strengthens the conscience. The process dimension of conscience is the moral reasoning that is aimed at establishing the right from the wrong course of action. This sometimes is also referred to as the actual conscience.52 When Christians take a keen attention to their thoughts based on the moral issues at hand their reason and intellect directs them to do what they have to do at that particular moment.53 Conscience as a process requires one to gather information, identify the moral choice, seek counsel, reflect and pray, and lastly evaluate alternatives before making a moral decision or judgment.54 Conscience as Judgment, after undertaking the moral decision making process of the real conscience, a Christian is thereafter required to make a solid judgment in accordance with their moral duty in that given case.55 This is making a decision about what one is required to do in a specific situation. After making this judgment, Christians experience an unconditional duty to ascend to this judgment of conscience. Conscience as judgment is an inner command to act in accordance with the command conscience. It is recommended that judgments of command conscience must be derived form a balanced attention to particularity and commonality of moral conscience.56 Christian conscience in this regard is that every decision made by any individual should be based on one’s inner command. In this regard, before a physician makes a euthanasia decision, he/she must consult his conscience/inner command. It is in the Christians interest to protect and respect life, and basing on this Euthanasia decisions are immoral and unethical and thus should not be encouraged. Conclusion In a nut shell, we live in a pluralistic world and every individual need one another in order to make the world a better place. Biblical model and principles for medical ethics can be said to the ethics that is derived from the scripture. In order for medical physicians to arrive at any ethical decision there are a myriad of biblical factors to consider; for instance, one must reason morally and he/she must have a conscience. From the above discussion, we have seen different skills employed in moral reasoning. Through theories like; divine command, harmonization of creation and revelation, Fundamental Freedom, and Fundamental option and ‘grave matter’ and ‘light matter’ we find different skills of moral reasoning. Further, we have also found that there are four main sources of moral knowledge, that is, the scripture, reason, experience, and tradition. Christian conscience is an unavoidable guide that empowers us to judge wisely basing on our past experiences. This conscience is divided into three dimensions; capacity, process, and judgment. Understanding these dimensions empowers us to make wise judgment particularly on what we ought to do in the here and now situations. References Braybrooke, David and Arthur Monahan. Common Good. In Encyclopedia of Ethics. Encyclopedia of Ethics, s.v. "common good," accessed March 18, 2013, http://www.credoreference.com/entry/routethics/common_good (p. 1-5) Connors, Russell and Patrick McCormick. Character, Choices, & Community: The Three Faces of Christian Ethics: Chapter Seven: Conscience: “Doing the Truth”. New York: Paulist Press, 1998. Curran, C. E. and McCormick, S.J. R. A. Readings in Moral Theology No.2: The Distinctiveness of Christian Ethics. New York: Paulist Press, 1989. Gascoigne, Robert. Christian Ethics – The Theological Debate. Melbourne: Australian Catholic University, 2012. Gascoigne, Robert. Christian Faith and Ethics – The Theological Debate. Melbourne: Australian Catholic University, 2012. Gascoigne, Robert. Sin and the Fundamental Option, p. 1-2 Gascoigne, Robert. What is the Relationship between Religion and Morality? p. 1 - 5 Grisez, G. The way of the Lord Jesus, Volume one; Christian Moral Principles. Chicago: Franciscan Herald Press, 1983. Hannon, P. Church, State, Morality and Law. Dublin: Gill and Macmillan, 1992. Kopfensteiner, T. The Theory of Fundamental Option and moral action. In Hoose, B. Christian Ethics: an Introduction. London: Geofrey Chapman, 1998. Lewis, Brian. Living in Pluralistic World: Cooperation in the Wrongdoing of others. Retrieved on 6/5/2013, from: http://www.yarrainstitute.org.au/Portals/0/docs/Publications/LIVING%20IN%20A%20PLURALISTICWORLD.pdf McCormick, R.A., The critical Calling: Reflections on Moral Dilemmas since Vatican II. Washington: Georgetown University Press, 1989. Ratzinger Joseph. Magisterium of the Church, Faith, Morality, p. 174- 189 Read More

For instance, through reason people can discern good without being attached to a specific religion. Human beings have the capacity to recognize the value and dignity of others and thereby showing them love, do what is just to them and thus commit themselves to high standards of morality.4 In accordance with the above argument, religion cannot be the sole contributor to morality as people can be ethical without being religious. Similarly, the enormous testimonies of religious experiences in human history have plaid a huge role in instilling and nurturing morality.

The Euthyphro dilemma is Plato’s classical dialogue that also tries to expound on this subject.5 According to Euthyphro, there are two questions that distinctively stand out; “is something good or right because it is commanded by God? Or is it commanded by God because is good?” with respect to this dilemma, taking the first part of it, it simply implies that anything made good or right is always as a result of divine authority.6 The second part of the dilemma basically means that things are themselves right and good because of God’s command.

These interpretations leave us with many questions unanswered, for instance, does it mean that certain vices are made good because of the divine command? Or is there any need for God’s command, rather does religious traditions have something to add to morality? Diffusing the confusion brought about by the above reasoning, there are several theories that have been formulated to aid in moral reasoning.7 They provide skills and guide posts that a medical physician should use for him or her to reason morally particularly with regard to euthanasia.

These theories are: the divine command theory, the harmony of creation and revelation, transcendental or fundamental freedom, and the fundamental option and ‘grave matter’ and light matter’. The divine command theory, directs human beings to follow moral commands because they represent and express Godliness which is revealed to human beings through the commandments of the religious traditions. For instance, the divine command like ‘Thou shall not kill’ implies that people should not kill one another because it is the will of God and thus they must obey that command.

8 Following this explanation medical physicians are obliged to protect life not to take life. The divine command demands that human beings should be able to distinguish between what the will of God is and what is not. In order to discern the will of God, human beings are obliged to use their reason to differentiate between Godly commands and devilish or wicked commands9. Furthermore, the divine theory posits that commands recognized through reason to be right, always are from God and wicked ones are not.

Using the divine command theory, medical physicians should reason and know that euthanasia is a sin and morally unacceptable. However, one can tell that human reason act independently thus can automatically differentiate between good and evil.10 Expounding on this further, it therefore means that, if medical physicians can reason to distinguish good and evil, then, there is no need to refer to the divine command. Harmonizing creation and revelation; this theory is superior to divine command basically because God’s will is not emphasized in isolation but rather God is the creator of everything.

11 For this reason, there is enough evidence that absolute goodness is found in all that God created. This theory explains that, reason is a gift from God. For instance, God is the foundation of everything and it is through this that an individual can be ethically upright without necessarily being religious or believing in God.12 The theory argues that without question, creation shows explicitly the goodness of God, it has its own kind and coherence and thus people do appreciate its relevance and goodness with or without the knowledge of God.

This theory also shows us that the onset of religious practices is found in revelation, where people have rare experiences of God thus creating a strong relationship with God’s goodness13.

Read More