Suicide and the Harm Principle

In this paper, I will explain John Stuart Mill’s moral theory of Utilitarianism, what I think it means, and how it works. I will also explain the Dax Cowart case, and determine if Dax’s choice to die was morally right or wrong. In order to fully understand the implications of Dax’s decision, and to accurately determine its affect on those his decision involves, I will break down and analyze the affect of Dax’s decision for Dax, his mother, Ada, and the Doctor. Lastly, I will gather prior evidence and form a valid conclusion of whether Dax’s choice was morally right or wrong.

Another reason to legalize assisted suicide is the empathy for our fellow. For some people who suffer chronic pain or terminal illnesses, suicide is a more ethical and respectable solution than suffer great pain until the day of their death, whereby people should have the obligation to relieve their suffering and respect their dignity. Even if take a life should be considered immoral, let patients suffer during the remaining time of life, with no hope of a better future or alleviating the pain will end is inhumane. People judge assisted suicide according to how much pain and suffering patient are suffering. However, there are differences between pain and suffering. While pain is an objective concept that can be measured, suffering is a subjective idea that cannot be measured (Ezekiel, 1999). The impossibility to measure the level of suffering open another question of how to know if assisted suicide is justified when only the patient know his grade of suffering. In this instance, the weight relapses in the patient decision again. Allowing assisted suicide society is preventing future terrible experiences that will convert the last days of patient life in torture. Studies of

Mill’s harm principle of ““One should not interfere with other people’s lives unless those people are doing harm to others” (p.G3), is in other words, if a person do not cause harm to others, there is no reason to prevent his/her actions. Mill’s belives that an individual is the supreme sovereign of his/her own acts. Even when the decisions taken may be some harm upon him/her, the responsibility of these actions is only on the individual.

Thanks to modern developments in medical technology, people in advanced countries today live longer and stay healthy until they are relatively older. The technology, however, also allows some people to hasten their death and make it relatively pain-free. As a result, many patients suffering from unbearable pain of certain incurable illnesses from time to time ask their physicians to help them commit suicide. Any physician who is asked to do this is under an ethical dilemma. On the one hand, the physician is asked to help relieve one from pain and suffering. On the other hand, by helping a patient commit suicide the physician is assisting someone to commit murder even if it is the case of self-murder. This ethical case known as Physician-Assisted Suicide (PAS) is a controversial topic in the United States and elsewhere. Since it is an ethical issue, one way of resolving the dilemma is to evaluate the morality of PAS from the perspective of classical and other ethical theories. Among these are utilitarianism, deontology, virtue ethics, relativism, emotivism, and ethical egoism. With the exception of deontology, any of these theories can be used to justify PAS easily. Deontology is the only view that places strong moral limitations on the application of PAS. Deontology's most prominent proponent Immanuel Kant strongly opposed suicide. However, the core principles of deontology may justify physician-assisted suicide

Explain in your own words the logic of Mill’s argument, and critically discuss whether happiness should be the criterion of morality.

The Topic that is have chosen is Topic #1 which is “What is utilitarianism? Suppose a man named Joe is dying of AIDS. He requests that his doctor prescribe him a lethal dose of medication in order to end his life now, before the worst suffering from AIDS begins. His family objects to this. How would Mill advise the doctor? What sort of questions would he ask? What facts would be relevant to evaluating the case and why would they be relevant?” in the following I will be presenting what utilitarianism is, how Mill would advise the doctor, and why he would advise the doctor, and what evidence would he use to persuade the doctor. Along with what the difference is between act and rule

Utilitarianism, or the Greatest Happiness Principle, states that the morality of an action should be judged based on the extent to which it produces happiness, or the opposite of happiness—an action is good as long as the result is happiness, and deemed bad if it results in pain. A clearer understanding of what Utilitarianism is can be gained by John Stuart Mill’s characterization of what it is not. He states, “I believe that the very imperfect notion ordinarily formed of its meaning, is the chief obstacle which impedes its reception; and that could it be cleared, even from only the grosser misconceptions, the question would be greatly simplified, and a large proportion of its difficulties removed” (Mill, 2007, p. 4). In defining Utilitarianism, Mill dispels common misconceptions that are held about Utilitarianism in order to give the reader a clearer understanding of the doctrine and the rationales that support it.

Mill's principle of utility seeks for the logical rationality of ethics through the consequences of actions as the consideration determining their morality, therefore the possession of happiness as opposed to the avoidance of pain. Utilitarianism might be an instance of a more general theory of right consequentialism, which supports that right and wrong can only, be reviewed by the kindness of consequences. This common kind of theory can be easily understood by considering the form of consequentialism. Consequentialism states that an act is right if, of those accessible to the agent at the time, it would produce the most overall value in the end. Utilitarian

I will be explaining John Stuart Mill’s view on ethics. This includes explaining the “Greatest Happiness Principle”, happiness, unhappiness, quality of pleasure, lying, and the relevance of time with his view. I will then explain how I agree with the principle of Rule Utilitarianism. I will also consider the objection of conflicting rules in Rule Utilitarianism as well as that of negative responsibility, giving my response to each.

The idea of universalizability strongly suits this case. To universalize the patient’s individual maxim, we would see that most if not all will find suicide morally justifiable because everyone at times may feel depressed. At this point, we look at the duty to preserve life at all costs, and find we cannot universalize the patient’s maxim. Kant was tempted with this maxim, but his will finds it immoral. He once said, “I still have strength enough to take my life, but I hold this to be immoral. Whoever deprives himself of life is a beast…” The extreme idea of suicide also looks at self-love. She wants to feel better, so she thinks death will accomplish this. The problem here is with death, you don’t feel anything anymore. Another angle on this case looks at the patient using the

Why is suicide the most debated topic in philosophy? There are many causes for a suicide, and generally the most obvious ones were not the most powerful. Rarely is suicide committed reflection. What sets off the crisis is almost always unverifiable. It is hard to fix the precise instant, the subtle step when the mind opted for death, it is easier to take away from the act itself the consequences it implies. Showing that the

In his essay, Utilitarianism Mill elaborates on Utilitarianism as a moral theory and responds to misconceptions about it. Utilitarianism, in Mill’s words, is the view that »actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.«1 In that way, Utilitarianism offers an answer to the fundamental question Ethics is concerned about: ‘How should one live?’ or ‘What is the good or right way to live?’.

Kevin Briggs is a retired California Highway patrol officer, who spent much of his years “patrolling the southern end of Marin, county which includes the Golden Gate Bridge” (Briggs).As many may connote this bridge with much positivity such as, to have a great view of San Francisco, others may connote it as the bridge that took their loved one . This bridge has been used numerous times for a suicide attempt. Suicide according to Vernon J. Geberth, M.S., M.P.S., is defined as the intentional taking of one’s own life (Geberth.). At a recent Ted Convention, Kevin delivered his inspiring and courageous speech titled “The Bridge Between Suicide and Life”, which argues the many consequences of suicide and the lasting effects it has on their loved ones. One of the main topics Kevin mentions in his speech is the fact that suicide is preventable and it doesn’t necessarily need to happen. In the audience of Kevin’s TED Talk were women and men who may have faced suicidal thoughts and or currently suffering from the loss of a loved one due to suicide and even the general population that may not be experiencing none of the following but are simply just listening for future references.Rhetorically, Kevin conveys this argument through rhetorical approaches such as rhetorical questions, logical evidence and even personal experience.

The more a question is argued the better that question becomes it is often said. That question begins to grow and the side effect of this is the more people it reaches. Whether that question can be put into a category of right or wrong it begs to be answered. Knowledge is something that people instinctively need to function when faced with a problem, an answer must be found or it begins to form eminent possibility in any direction. The problem is a question that no one can truly answer for anyone other than the person faced with it, which is one's own self. The arguments from either side of this philosophical problem must not be centered around one's own belief but all that share the dilemma, which is in fact every human being.

For some teens, striving for perfection has led to harming their own health and wellbeing such as living with depression and suicide. Teenagers today are relying on what they see in ads, T.V., magazines and on the internet for their input on appearances, the way they think not only comes from media sources, but from family and friends.