Of Philosophy, Ethics and Moral about Euthanasia: The Discomfort between Modernity and Postmodernity

Abstract

Objectives: To define euthanasia, as well as orthanasia, misthanasia and dysthanasia, to start from this, to discuss the different philosophical, ethical and moral visions that surround the subject. Methods: Exploratory qualitative study which defined from the existing literature the pertinent concepts and from them brought discussions about euthanasia. Results: Euthanasia ("Good Death") and dysthanasia are medical procedures that concern the death of the human being and the most appropriate way of dealing with it. Euthanasia is primarily concerned with the quality of human life in its final phase, while dysthanasia seeks the extension of the human life quantity, fighting death. Euthanasia differs from social euthanasia, or misthanasia (miserable death) because it has no relation with the search for a good, smooth and painless death. Orthothanasia (art of well-dying) rejects all forms of misthanasia, yet does not fall into the trap of euthanasia or dysthanasia. There is a link between the economic devaluation of human beings and the cultural tendency that is increasingly emphasized in refusing the will of the right to live for those who are too weak to demand this right. Conclusion: A dichotomy between favorable views and contrary to euthanasia was obtained. This discussion is surrounded by modern moral, ethical and philosophical values that conflict with of the postmodernism. Euthanasia within a modern concept cannot be contemplated with the dominant values of the Christian morality. This moral is incorporated by the norms of health accepted by the majority of health professionals.

Aspects and dilemmas of euthanasia in modern times

“…33 Unrealistic expectations are common in artificial attempts to prolong the mostly unnecessary treatment of sick persons deprived of a social sense of the usefulness of living in many ways that prologue the previously mentioned processes of dying. 34 In addition to bioethical deontological, medical, etc attempts to preserve dignity, it is important to take into consideration the more realistic individual state of the dying, in order to identify areas of special importance and value for the mentioned contexts and narratives in procedures before euthanasia. 35 Determination of the objective state of affairs and the contemporary euthanasia situation is inevitable, in order to really help the dying, before euthanasia itself.…”

Euthanasia and moral dilemmas

“…Ortotanazija (orthothanasia) ili "umetnost dobrog umiranja", prema navedenoj klasifikaciji, odbacuje sve oblike mithanazije, ali nije isto što i eutanazija ili distanazija. Postoji veza između ekonomske devalvacije ljudskih bića i kulturne tendencije koja se sve više naglašava u odbijanju volje prava na život za one koji su preslabi da to pravo traže (5). Osim navedene podele, postoji i podela zasnovana na kriterijumu postupanja lekara prilikom izvršenja predmetne radnje.…”

“…Utilitaristi smatraju da i najbolji ili najčistiji motivi mogu da dovedu do loših posledica, odnosno da je moralna vrednost ponašanja u posledicama, dakle, ako su posledice dobre, čin je moralno opravdan. Odstupajući od ovog gledišta, može se posmatrati i postmodernistička struja eutanazije, koja smrt i besmrtnost tretira kao faktor individualizacije odnosno jedan od stavova postmodernizma je da je sve relativno i subjektivno (5,24).…”

“…Sa povećanjem očekivanog životnog veka, diskusije o mogućnosti intervencije u životnom ciklusu, ubrzanju ili produženju trenutka smrti, ponovo su oživljene, što je možda jedno od centralnih pitanja etike primenjene na zdravlje (5). Tako će se prilikom vrednovanja preduzete radnje lišavanja života, sa moralnog aspekta, najčešće poći od pobuda iz kojih se preduzimanju navedene radnje pristupilo.…”