Euthanasia has been the talk of century all over the world as it has developed many controversy as some argued that it is ethically right or wrong. So what is euthanasia? Merriam Webster Dictionary (2015) defines euthanasia as per following:

Euthanasia is also known as assisted suicide by physicians, doctors or others. It is also a form of mercy killing which basically means to take a deliberate action with the express intention of ending a life to relieve intractable suffering. Some may interpret euthanasia as the practice of ending a life in a painless manner. While all this different interpretation is right, we can segregate these terms into active or passive euthanasia.

Voluntary Euthanasia is a type of euthanasia where the dying person gives permission or consent for the doctors to proceed ending his or her life. Another name for this would be assisted suicide as the dying person is the person who are requesting to end their life.

Non-voluntary differs from voluntary as in most cases the patient does not gives any permission or consents to end their life. A good example for this scenario would be a terminally coma patient that have no chance of living as doctors assisted the patient to end his or her life to avoid further suffering. Another example is where the person is a child who is mentally or emotionally able to take the decision but is not regarded in law as old enough to make such decision. Non-voluntary euthanasia is also known as assisted killing as the person ends another person's life without the consent of the person.

Euthanasia conducted against the will of the patient is termed involuntary euthanasia. This type of euthanasia takes place when the person who is killed made no request and gave no consent on the matter. For example, during the period of World War II, Adolf Hitler enacted the Aktion T4 program in October 1939 to euthanize "incurably ill, physically or mentally disabled, emotionally distraught, and elderly people." Such act is termed as in-voluntary euthanasia as the dying person does not give permission nor allowing their life to be ended due to their incurably illness (Wikipedia Online, 2015). Another example of this euthanasia is when a soldier screaming in agony requesting help as he was shot and suffers massive incurably injury. The doctor knows that the soldier will die in matter of few minutes and administers a lethal injection to ends the soldier's life. Such act is normally knowns as mercy killing.

All these euthanasia types are divided into two forms of euthanasia which is active and passive euthanasia. Active euthanasia is a direct act of ending a person's life such as direct kill by injecting lethal injection to the patient. Passive euthanasia is when death is brought about by an omission by withdrawing or withholding treatment (BBC News, 2015). In other word, stop treatment and let nature run its course.

Voluntary euthanasia has been the focus of great controversy in recent years. In some countries, euthanasia have been legalised and various government policies and bills have been implemented to support euthanasia.For example, Belgium is one of the countries that have legalised euthanasia and this law has been in place ever since September 2002. India is yet another country to do so as their law recognise only passive euthanasia as legal (New Health Guide, 2015). However, not all countries supports the act of euthanasia as endless debates whether euthanasia is right or wrong, good or evil, fair or unfair. Some might say it is unethical to do so as it's the same as committing suicide while some might disagree and felt it is unfair to prolong the suffering of a person. So which is it ethically right then? Why some supports and enacts the act of euthanasia while others not? Well, for the sake of preparing this OUMH 3203 Assignment paper lets dig deeper into this argument.

Let's discuss more on these controversy's arguments based on a normative philosophy and the ethical relativism to the issue at hand. Moral reasoning is required when dealing with such controversies before we can come to a conclusion. Therefore, a study on normative philosophy is needed to evaluate the ethical relativism and values for the act of voluntary euthanasia. Three major ethical principles will be discuss as per following:

1.Eternal law theory (Natural Law)
2.Classical teleological ethical theory: Utilitarianism
3.Personal Liberty theory

Ethical PRINCIPLES

THEORY 1 – ETERNAL LAW

When we talk about the moral values of euthanasia whether it is right or wrong, the first ethical principles that we need to go through is the law of eternal or commonly knowns as Natural Law. Wikipedia (2015) defines the natural law principles as per following:

That being said, eternal law is an apparent in state of nature and incorporated in the mind of God as it is revealed in the Holy Scripture (OUM3203 Professional Ethics, 2013 pp8). Such law upholds the highest self-authority for any person depending on their religion. For example, those who are practicing Islam as their religion have a religious law which prohibits them from eating pork. Such law is considered as an eternal law and should be used as a norm on defining the moral values of voluntary euthanasia.

In Malaysia, everyone have the freedom to practice any religion. Due to that fact, Malaysia have multiple religions such as Islam, Buddhism, Christians, Hinduism, Confucianism and many more. Most of Malaysians are Muslims because Malaysia is an Islamic state, and followed by Buddhism. Let us discuss more on arguments of voluntary euthanasia from an Islamic & Buddhism stand point.

From Islamic ethical stand point, voluntary euthanasia is strictly forbidden as it the Holy Quran strictly prohibits suicide for any reasons. The prohibition of voluntary euthanasia is clearly stated in the Quran as per extract below: 

It is unlawful for the patient to kill himself and it is unlawful for someone else to kill him even if he is given the permission to kill him. The former case will be suicide and the latter will be aggression against the other by killing him, for his permission does not render the unlawful act lawful.

The patient whatever his illness and however sick he is shall not be killed because of desperation and loss of hope in recovery or to prevent the transfer of the patient's disease to others, and whoever commits the act of killing will be a deliberate killer. Another verse from the Holy Quran also stated the following:

This clearly confirms that Islam forbids completely practicing voluntary euthanasia under any circumstances.

Buddhism is the second largest religion in Malaysia, after Islam, with 19.2% of Malaysia's population being Buddhist and mainly practised by Malaysian Chinese. The first precept of the Panca Sila states, "Do not kill any living being". It does not appear that suicide as euthanasia necessarily violates this precept, however Buddhist Discourses on the Use of Suicide to End the Physical Suffering of a Terminal Illness (Wikipedia, 2015). The story of these two monks are similar and both stories concludes that it was considered by the Buddha himself that suicide is as acceptable course of action to be carried out to avoid unbearable physical pain associated with terminal illness.

However, according to Dalai Lama, he said that Buddhist believed every life was previous and none more so than human life, adding that it's better to avoid euthanasia. From his point of view, he believes that Buddhist way is to judge the right and wrong or the pros and cons in a situations. For example, a person in a coma with no possibility of recovery or a woman whose pregnancy threatened her life or that of the child or both where the harm caused by not taking action might be greater loss. Therefore, in conclusion from his stand point is that every case should be judged case by case basis instead.

Buddhism does not have clear moral ground when it comes to voluntary euthanasia. Initial precepts for Buddhism clearly stated that "Do not kill other living being", which euthanasia violates this precepts, however the case of Vakkali Sutta and Channa Sutta contradicts to these precepts as they believe euthanasia should be judged case by case basis instead.

Based on Islamic & Buddhism view point, we can conclude that Voluntary Euthanasia is something that would not be accepted by the Malaysian community based on Eternal Law of Ethic Principles as majority of Malaysians practices Islam while Buddhism consists of 19.2% of population believed that voluntary euthanasia should be judged case by case basis.

THEORY 2 –UTILITARIANISM

After we have gone through the eternal law normative ethics, let us look at a different ethic theories. Wikipedia (2015) defines Utilitarianism as per following:

The Utilitarianism is cause and affects moral theory when it comes to modern healthcare alongside nursing, deontology and pharmacists. This theory believes that any action should cause the greatest happiness for the greatest number, and the end result is the determination of the moral worth of the act. That is the key formula for this moral theory. Therefore, when it comes to Euthanasia, it will increase happiness but at the same time reduce the pain.

Based on the illustration above, the level of pain and the progression of the disease would also render the person unable to enjoy the activities that his or her life pleasurable, so there could be no higher intellectual or emotional pleasures to balance the physical pain. The person will continues to suffer beyond negative value. In contrast, his death will create a value of zero, thus the misery is reduced (refer orange line). In addition, his family and friends will be spared the pain of watching him suffer through a prolonged illness.

Aside from that, this theory also empowers the terminally ill patient the right to make his own decision as he have a complete sovereign over his own body. If he voluntary wishes to die, then it is his own rights to die, and not even the government nor does anyone else have the rights to interfere with the decision.

Lastly, one must not choose Euthanasia easily because everyone must consider the objection that perhaps a sudden cure for an individual's illness could be discovered. There are many newly discovered researches about remedies for terminally-ill patients. The reason why no one should lose their hopes.

It's up to us whether we should use utilitarianism theory as the based for our beliefs in this issue. Such a policy also answers a common objection to euthanasia whereby people suffering from crippling pain are not rational enough to decide that they want to die. 

THEORY 3 –PERSONAL LIBERTY

We often heard the term liberty in many English war movies as they screams out liberty or the word freedom. This theory is an ethical system proposed by Robert Nozick (1974), whereas the system is based upon the primacy of a single value rather than a single principle. Liberty theory empowers individuals the freedom to their own life and action, and any institution, government or law that contradicts to their own will be rejected even if it's resulting to a betterment of the individual. In short, liberty focuses on the human rights, and the rights to live.

"Give me liberty, or give me death", a famous quote from Patrick Henry (1775) which made a perfect summary for Euthanasia. He argued that everyone should have the right to death as the body belongs individually to everyone. Individual is wholly free to make choices or commit actions irregardless whether it's self-damaging, stupid, or even the act of voluntary euthanasia. However, it is limited to the action of oneself as long as it does not infringe on the liberties of other people. Extrapolating from this, the individual also holds the ultimate decision making power when it comes to the termination of a life they find no longer fulfilling or desirable due to prolonged incurable disease.

When it comes to voluntary euthanasia issue, this theory is commonly and widely accepted in most Western countries. Many western countries embraces the personal liberty as they have strong belief that ultimately everyone should have freedom in making their own decision for their own life. Thus, that is why we heard the term liberty or freedom frequently especially when it comes to an American movies. Euthanasia is legalised in some states in the United States and these include Oregon, Washington, Montana and Vermont. However, these countries only legalised passive euthanasia as any direct euthanasia action such as administration of lethal injections is still considered as homicide and illegal. 

CONCLUSION

After going through three major Ethical principles whether the voluntary euthanasia should be allowed or not, I have come to a conclusion that it should be strictly forbidden especially in Malaysia.

Based on the first theory which is based on the eternal law by Islam, it is clearly and definitively states that any act of suicide will be condemned for eternity. As a muslim myself, I uphold this law to the highest esteem and will not even consider whether voluntary euthanasia should be enact or not. For argument sake, let's include other pros and cons of the other factors as well. First off, 61.3 percent of the Malaysian population practices Islam; 19.8 percent Buddhism; 9.2 percent Christianity; 6.3 percent Hinduism; and 1.3 percent traditional Chinese religions. Based on the figures alone is justified enough that we should not allowed the act of voluntary euthanasia.

Now, let us look at Utilitarianism ethical principle as utilitarianism upholds an individual happiness above all and if the person desires death over a prolonged illness, the act of euthanasia should be enact. I disagree on this as we never know what holds us in the future as everything is fated and determined by god. For example, the doctors confirmed that there is no cure whatsoever for the patient, and the patient is extremely suffering from this prolonged diseases and euthanasia seems to be the best option for a quick release of pain. What if the patient committed euthanasia, and shortly after that the doctors found the cure already? Even so no cure was found, I still believe that only God should have the power of the person's life and death.

Moving on to the last ethical theory we've discussed: Personal Liberty. I personally dislike the idea of personal liberty as it grants freedom to an individual as he or she is free and responsible for their own actions. Terminally ill patients tends to have lower level of rationality as they tend to ease their pain as soon as possible. Is it the best course of action then? I don't think so.

In conclusion, voluntary euthanasia may have some pros and cons based on different morale view, however due to my strong belief in Islam, I would have to disagree on the enactment of such act. Life is a linear sequence of fate destined by Allah s.w.t as we can only make choices through our life by going through a journey which ultimately returning back to god. As such, the act of voluntary euthanasia should not be allowed in Malaysia.