Sample Solution

William May, a prominent bioethicist, and several panelists discussed the arguments for and against euthanasia in his book “Death Talk: The Case Against Euthanasia and Physician Assisted Suicide”. The main argument made by May is that there is an ethical distinction between actively killing (euthanasia) versus allowing someone to die naturally (letting die). He also states that both of these actions should be considered immoral because they go against what he calls the “principle of respect for life” which holds that human life should not be taken away deliberately regardless of its quality or suffering.

Other panelists offer differing opinions on both sides of the debate. On one hand, some argue that euthanasia can be seen as an act of compassion if it puts the patient out of their misery while avoiding them from going through any more pain or suffering than necessary (Hendin 2001). Others feel this may devalue human life since it implies death has become a way to solve problems rather than something we try our best to avoid at all costs (Quill 1994).

The ethical theories involved in each argument range from utilitarianism, which suggests euthanasia can help maximize pleasure for those in suffering; to deontology, which argues that even when a situation seems dire mercy killing should still be avoided at all costs due to its potential consequences . Moreover , many Kantians see suicide or assisted suicide as violations of autonomy therefore making them wrong under any circumstances no matter how much pain someone might experiencing.

In conclusion , William May and various panelists have presented numerous arguments both favor against euthanasia with different ethical perspectives driving each position . While many utilitarian thinkers believe active intervention help end intense distress other moral theorists instead emphasize importance protecting sanctity life above all else thus motivating them oppose such practices altogether.