MUN BRIEFING PAPER
Euthanasia: a human right?
MUN is an amusing, fun, challenging, action-packed, electrifying and generally bizarre experience
for everyone. Amidst the jollification and merrymaking we shall be exploring some very quite serious
current, personal and pertinent moral issues. But if you are thinking it is all going to be doom and
gloom, you could not be further from the truth. Why, you ask? It is because this year you are being
chaired by some very enthusiastic people who go by the names of Rowan, Natsuki and Matt. I’m
Matt by the way. Now that we’ve been introduced, I am going to tell you a little bit about my role as
a chair. I’m here to help you (whether you like it or not) so please don’t hesitate to contact me via
my email address at the bottom of the final page. If you spam me, there will be consequences. I
wish you all the best of luck in writing your resolutions and look forward to seeing you in March.
And just remember Hubbard’s wise words when attending the conference, “Don’t take life too
seriously, you will never get out of it alive.”
“And I will use my regiments for the benefit of the ill in accordance with my ability and my
judgment, but from [what is] to their harm or injustice I will keep [them]. And I will not give a drug
that is deadly to anyone if asked [for it], nor will I suggest the way to such counsel.”
Hippocratic Oath, c. 400 BC (Miles, 2004: xiii – xiv)
The Hippocratic Oath that dates from about 400 BC reflects a view that the medical profession is
opposed to the taking of life. In the Middle Ages it was reborn and adapted to cohere with Christian
lines of thinking. Even today, various medical institutions in Europe and America incorporate some
kind of oath into their graduation ceremonies. However, today, the medical tradition - which
emphasises the sanctity of human life - is being challenged with another school of thought that
explores the idea that some human lives are not worth living due to the fact they are of a poor
quality. Euthanasia, which means ‘easy death’ in Greek, is often referred to in modern contemporary
medical circles as mercy killing. Medical developments and the advances of life-support technology
have brought the issue to light; due also to the fact modern medicine is stressing the quality of
human life and patients’ autonomy and rights. We put down our pets if they are suffering and ill. We
do it because we do not want to see creatures we love suffer. How can we then say it is immoral to
take the life of someone who is critically ill?
The very idea that we are now able to prolong life also raises various questions. Firstly, when should
we stop prolonging life? Secondly, should we ever shorten human life? And finally, if we are able to
stop making an effort to support life, would it not be merciful to shorten it in the first place?
When we talk about euthanasia we need to distinguish between two types. The first is active
euthanasia. This is performed by means of intervention such as giving someone a lethal injection or
medication. The second is euthanasia by omission or passive euthanasia. This, for example, would
be the withdrawal of necessary provisions, such as food or life support, with the intention of causing
death. When people talk about legalised euthanasia, there is usually a focus on the will of the
patient. This is known as voluntary euthanasia. In Belgium and the Netherlands, doctors can
practise voluntary euthanasia freely without fear of prosecution.
If there is voluntary euthanasia, there must be non-voluntary euthanasia. This is when an individual,
who is in no position to express his own interests, is killed on the assumption that s/he would want
to die. To an extent this has been sanctioned under UK law. In 1989, Tony Bland was left in a
George Watson’s College MUN Conference 2013
MUN BRIEFING PAPER
permanent vegetative state when the Hillsborough football stadium collapsed. It was decided by the
House of Lords that it was in Tony’s best interests to remove his tube-feed as his life was no longer
worth living.
Even though active Euthanasia remains illegal in most countries in the world, there is growing
emphasis on physician-assisted suicide. The doctor does not kill the patient in this instance, but he
is an accomplice. He provides the means necessary for the patient to kill himself. This is legal in
Switzerland, Belgium the Netherlands and the state of Oregon in the United States.
There are various reasons for voluntary euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. Technological
advances in medicine have made people fearful of not so much under-treatment but rather overtreatment. We now have the ability to prolong life much greater than we used to, which begs the
question, when should we stop? Not only are people fearful of over-treatment they are fearful of
dying in an unfamiliar place and also the incredible pain that prolonging life entails. Furthermore, a
number of individuals fear death without dignity. They fear the embarrassment of being helpless and
being cared for by others. Do we not as humans have an intrinsic right to die?
There have also been many objections to voluntary euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. The
hospice movement that aims to relieve both fear of over-treatment and pain was established by
Dame Cicely Saunders. It encourages good palliative care as well as the self-administration of
powerful painkillers. The aim of the hospice was not to encourage patients to ask for help to shorten
their lives, but rather to provide care, both good and compassionate in order so that patients would
not want to shorten their lives. Although it is true that many individuals fear of death without
dignity, is it really true that being in need of care is an indignity? For example, dementia,
subjectively may seem like an indignity, however, does this mean that people with dementia have
actually lost their intrinsic human dignity? In addition to this, would accepting care from someone
not show a recognition and acceptance of human sympathy? It is pointed out also that if euthanasia
were legalised, there may be more scope for the elderly to be coerced into getting one as a means of
unburdening their relatives. Furthermore, many of those upholding the sanctity of life have argued
that if voluntary euthanasia was legalised, this may encourage non-voluntary euthanasia - essentially
advocating the murder of innocent patients. Is it not virtuous to uphold the right to life?
In relation to writing your Euthanasia Position Paper, please consider what your country’s
perspective is when answering these questions:
What is your view on the sanctity of life versus the quality of life?
What is your view on the patients’ freedom and autonomy?
What does your legislation say about euthanasia?
When should you stop prolonging human life?
When should you shorten human life?
What is your view on active and passive euthanasia?
What is your view on voluntary and non-voluntary euthanasia?
What is your view on physician-assisted suicide?
George Watson’s College MUN Conference 2013
MUN BRIEFING PAPER
What technological and medical advances have influenced your opinion on Euthanasia?
What is your religious perspective on the subject matter?
What ethical issues would you raise concerning euthanasia?
Some useful links:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/euthanasia/
http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/Euthanasiaandassistedsuicide/Pages/Introduction.aspx
http://www.politics.co.uk/reference/euthanasia
http://www.dignityindying.org.uk/
http://www.euthanasia.com/
http://www.carenotkilling.org.uk/
http://www.spuc.org.uk/education/euthanasia/briefing
http://euthanasia.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000136
http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/support/terminalillness_euthanasia.shtml
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/euthanasia-inother-countries-845458.html
http://nitawriter.wordpress.com/2008/02/14/euthanasia-pros-and-cons/
Go forth and write your Position Papers and Resolutions!
Position Papers (you have to write one on each of the 4 Topics in our Committee) are an outline of
about 50 words on your country’s view on the Topic. You are also expected to bring with you to the
Conference a Resolution on two of the Committee Topics. You will only be considered for a
Committee Award if you do these two things!
Again, I reiterate my comments from before. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any
questions or queries. I enclose my email address below (remember what I said)
Thanks!
Matt
morningstarman66@yahoo.co.uk
George Watson’s College MUN Conference 2013
MUN BRIEFING PAPER
Where Can I Find Information About My Country?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/country_profiles/default.stm
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html
http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld
Where Can I Find Information About Global Issues?
http://www.newint.org/
http://www.idebate.org/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world/
http://www.amnesty.org.uk/
George Watson’s College MUN Conference 2013