Public Participation in Controversial Policy_BeltC

.docx

School

Grand Canyon University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

634

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by cabelt828

1 Public Participation in Controversial Policy Chrystal Belt Grand Canyon University ADM-634- Policy Study Dr. Cream March 23, 2022

2 Public Participation in Controversial Policy Assisted suicide is a highly debated. The subject initiates emotionally and ethically charged arguments on both sides of the discussion. Some would say it’s the right of an individual and the moral obligation of society to assist or support the ending of a person’s own life to end suffering. The other says it’s immoral to choose the option of death over the options of assistance in solving an issue or comforting a person in suffering until their death comes in a natural way. Then we must answer as to what is the Christian world view and how do we enter into conversation about this subject as Christian policy makers being not everyone has the same belief system (Dugdale et al., 2019). Assisted Suicide Debate Let’s look at the first view. Sweden has implemented assisted suicide into their public policy as a legal option. As they define it, a person must be in “existential Suffering”, of a sound mind and must commit the act themselves. Basically, they are provided the tools and education by a physician to perform the act but carry out the act themselves. The issue with this wording is there is no solid definition what is considered “Existential Suffering”. This definition includes degenerative physical condition at which the death of the person is eminent and without curability, it also hold that a person who feels they no longer have a societal benefit or see a good future for themselves are experiencing existential suffering emotionally. So, by this broad definition any person of a sound mind can go to see a medical professional claim existential suffering and have a physician assist them in committing suicide (Gaignard, 2019). The moral argument holding to this practice and definition would be that if a person is going to end their own life, they should be able to do so in a humane manner as well as a person should have the right to die just as any other right. This brings into question as well the issue of other

3 ramifications such as medical and life insurance policies. If there is a legal way to end one’s own life with the assistance of a physician, then that is a medical procedure and should be covered. If it is a medical procedure how much of that should be covered by tax dollars? Would it not be cheaper and more merciful to help those on government assistance humanly end their own suffering? Many hold this view based on what they consider merciful and economical (American Medical Association, 2016). Passing Controversial Policy The second view is that people experiencing Existential suffering are entitled to assistance to solve their problems, if possible, to improve the life they have and should die in a natural manner. They feel that it is against the ethos a healer to assist in the ending of life rather than the saving of that life. They feel that the implementation of a legal form of suicide will be a slippery slope and decent into immoral practice where death is considered an acceptable way to solve many issues a person may be having other than terminal illness and physical suffering from that illness. They feel that once implemented the value of a person’s life will be reduced eventually to a monetary value, societal contribution, and a viable option to be rid of the “unwanted” (Gaignard, 2019). This side of the argument interestingly enough ties into the anti- abortion mindset that the value of a human life is not determined by the other humans around it but has its own intrinsic value as its own unit. I lean this way. Each person has a value and should be supported and helped to improve their life as it stands, and the improvement of the individual’s life will lead to a broader societal improvement (Dugdale et al., 2019). The Christian Worldview As a Christian how should we see this issue? Would it not be merciful to assist those in suffering to end said suffering? The Christian world view is merciful and would seek to end the

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help