안락사의 윤리적 문제— 의사조력자살을 중심으로 —

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to survey pro and con arguments of euthanasia introducing several types of euthanasia and to criticize physician-assisted suicide. This article will provide a practical solution to physician-assisted suicide. Recently, the development of medical technology provokes many ethical problems associated with euthanasia. With the development of medicine, not only is the extent of euthanasia enlarged but also the methods of euthanasia move from passive to active. Lastly, protagonists of euthanasia try to legalize active euthanasia including physician-assisted suicide beyond passive euthanasia. Before, the argument of euthanasia used to concentrate on easing the pain of the patient. But now the argument focuses putting the patient right to death. Euthanasia is divided into active euthanasia and passive euthanasia by the methods used. The different types include voluntary, nonvoluntary, involuntary euthanasia according to a patient' will. Physician-assisted suicide is an action inducing death or helping a patient commit suicide, such as a prescription for lethal barbiturates or the means for a patient to commit suicide. A physician who formally cooperates in the killing acts as instrument of death. So physician-assisted suicide has many ethical problems because it actively takes the life of humans. The principle of utility would seem to endorse euthanasia. Whenever suffering is great and the condition of a patient is without medical hope, then it would be prudent to approve putting the patient to death. In such a case, we seem to be acting to end suffering and to bring about a state of affairs in which happiness exceeds unhappiness. The principal of autonomy argues that the values of promoting self-determination and individual well-being outweighs the likely negative consequences. Physicians should respect the autonomy of the patient. Also releasing terrible suffering of a patient is regarded as a beneficial act motivated by love. Based on the quality of life, an incompetent person's life is no longer of any value, and that killing is a benefit rather than letting a patient's suffering continue. The principle of double effect makes it morally acceptable to give medication for the relief of pain, even if the indirect result of the medication will shorten the life of the recipient. The intended result is not the death of the person but the relief of suffering. From the perspective of bioethics, we must notice and regulate the possibility of abuse and mistakes of euthanasia. If euthanasia is legalized, stricter regulations would need to be enforced. Therefore the decision to terminate a life requires a prudent judgement without abusing the privilege and making mistakes. We must find out an aspect of inhumane element of euthanasia and behind the argument of euthanasia to discover the most valuable factor, such as the dignity of life. At the same time, we must establish the proper social insurance system and hospice system that eases the burden on the family as the alternative effort of euthanasia. The purpose of this article is to survey pro and con arguments of euthanasia introducing several types of euthanasia and to criticize physician-assisted suicide. This article will provide a practical solution to physician-assisted suicide. Recently, the development of medical technology provokes many ethical problems associated with euthanasia. With the development of medicine, not only is the extent of euthanasia enlarged but also the methods of euthanasia move from passive to active. Lastly, protagonists of euthanasia try to legalize active euthanasia including physician-assisted suicide beyond passive euthanasia. Before, the argument of euthanasia used to concentrate on easing the pain of the patient. But now the argument focuses putting the patient right to death. Euthanasia is divided into active euthanasia and passive euthanasia by the methods used. The different types include voluntary, nonvoluntary, involuntary euthanasia according to a patient' will. Physician-assisted suicide is an action inducing death or helping a patient commit suicide, such as a prescription for lethal barbiturates or the means for a patient to commit suicide. A physician who formally cooperates in the killing acts as instrument of death. So physician-assisted suicide has many ethical problems because it actively takes the life of humans. The principle of utility would seem to endorse euthanasia. Whenever suffering is great and the condition of a patient is without medical hope, then it would be prudent to approve putting the patient to death. In such a case, we seem to be acting to end suffering and to bring about a state of affairs in which happiness exceeds unhappiness. The principal of autonomy argues that the values of promoting self-determination and individual well-being outweighs the likely negative consequences. Physicians should respect the autonomy of the patient. Also releasing terrible suffering of a patient is regarded as a beneficial act motivated by love. Based on the quality of life, an incompetent person's life is no longer of any value, and that killing is a benefit rather than letting a patient's suffering continue. The principle of double effect makes it morally acceptable to give medication for the relief of pain, even if the indirect result of the medication will shorten the life of the recipient. The intended result is not the death of the person but the relief of suffering. From the perspective of bioethics, we must notice and regulate the possibility of abuse and mistakes of euthanasia. If euthanasia is legalized, stricter regulations would need to be enforced. Therefore the decision to terminate a life requires a prudent judgement without abusing the privilege and making mistakes. We must find out an aspect of inhumane element of euthanasia and behind the argument of euthanasia to discover the most valuable factor, such as the dignity of life. At the same time, we must establish the proper social insurance system and hospice system that eases the burden on the family as the alternative effort of euthanasia.