Euthanasia is considered a morally acceptable choice for increasing numbers of people in the twentieth century due to significant social and technological changes in society and medicine. However, the end-of-life needs and will of the patients require crucial conversations about advance-care planning with appropriate documentation that records their explicit desires before the crisis to avoid any misunderstandings in the clinical practice. A Christian worldview is different in terms of dignity, human suffering, and the consequences of a good death. From the moral point of view based on the Christian faith, George faces a choice defined by a significant ethical difference between intentionally ending a life and accepting the end of life.
For the Christian believer, the suffering has to be relieved concerning the restrictions and principles reflected in the Bible and God’s command not to kill an innocent person. Such a theological understanding of the intentional acceleration of death constitutes the distortion of the idea of a good death. To be morally justified within the Christian worldview, George should yield his freedom to God’s will and purpose as the absolute of true freedom. Thus, George will perform his ultimate act of true human freedom in form of God. Furthermore, by leaving his life to God’s will, George will commit himself to the main principle of the Christian world that gives meaning and purpose to suffering (Hoehner, 2020). To be a faithful follower of Jesus Christ, George needs to recognize the limitations of medicine timely. Therefore, by rejecting or withdrawing a therapy, he accepts these limits under God’s sovereign and providential control.
Order this paper