Coronavirus outbreak was first reported to the WHO by Chinese authorities on 31st December 2019. The first case of coronavirus pandemic was reported in Wuhan city. The virus is now spread in over 106 countries. According to the latest statistics, over 144,000 cases of coronavirus have been reported across the world. About 5400 people have died across the globe and most of the deaths have been reported in China. According to the statistics, over 70,000 people have recovered after showing symptoms of the disease (Worldometer, 2020). World Health Organization (WHO) declared coronavirus a pandemic after it affected over 100 countries of the world and caused thousands of deaths.
All the countries are taking precautionary measures and responding to
the disease on priority bases. Healthcare systems across the world have
provided patients with isolation wards to avoid further spread of the disease. Among
all these efforts, a strange case appeared in North Korea where a patient
having coronavirus was shot dead (Jamie, 2020).
According to reports, the patient was an official who returned from
China and was kept in the isolation ward. He was later shot dead to completely
eliminate the traces of the virus in the country. Further investigation is
underway but, North Korean authorities have been denying these allegations.
This case has started a new debate regarding the ethical, legal, and
religious implications of killing someone having an epidemic disease. The question
arises in one’s mind that is this appropriate to kill anyone in order to avoid
the further spread of epidemic disease? This article overviews some of the
ethical and religious perspectives on killing any patient for the good of
others.
1. Ethical and legal perspectives
In many countries of the world, killing a patient having a serious
medical condition is prohibited due to the intrinsic disvalue of killing
anyone. Hypocritical perspective also considers it wrong to kill seriously ill
patients with or without the patient’s consent. These types of killings can put
the relationship between patient and health care system at stake. The
professional dignity of the medical field also acknowledges the right to
objection to killing seriously ill patients. Medical ethics also recognize the
right to object the killing of a patient in any form, either it is euthanasia
or some other way of killing (Nunes & Rego,
2016).
2. Religious perspectives
As discussed above, most of the countries disallow euthanasia in any of
its forms. But, some sections of society favor these types of acts in rare
cases. But, even if these types of killings are in accordance with laws in some
parts of the world, religious values of doctors may provide them with the right
to object these practices. So let’s analyze this issue from religious
perspectives in order to have better insight into the problem.
2.1 Islamic Perspective
All Muslims strongly believe in human life's sanctity. As per Islamic
beliefs, the end of one's life is already fixed by God Who is the actual
Creator and the Owner of one’s sacred life. Muslims believe that the life of
human beings should end in a natural way as ordained by Allah Almighty. Islam
does not allow any interference in the death of any human being through
personal decisions or the assistance of the doctors (Godlee, 2015).
The religion Islam teaches that God has given life and the absolute
authority of taking this life back also lies with God. Al-Quran (16:61) guides
that time period for any one's life is fixed and no one can add or deduce a
moment from this period. The Holy Quran further enhanced the sanctity of human
life by instructing that one should not take the sacred life of human beings,
other than to provide justice. (Al-Quran 17:33).
So, it can be believed that as per Islamic beliefs physicians or
healthcare systems would be considered to have committed an illegal and immoral
act if they involve themselves in killing any patient directly or indirectly at
any stage. Islam forbids to deliberately end or hasten anyone’s life. In addition, Islam teaches to accept illness and suffering,
and guides to be tolerant and patient in difficult times. Muslims believe that
these sufferings can take away all their previous sins (Godlee, 2015).
2.2 Christianity
Christianity, in general, is also against the killing of innocent human
beings. The medical conditions and severity of illness are irrelevant when it
is about taking someone’s life. So voluntary and forced death is not supported
in Christianity as well.
The stance of the Catholic Church
As per the beliefs of the Catholic
Church, nothing and nobody can allow the killing of human beings in any way. Irrespective
of the age or stage of life, no one is allowed to kill human beings whether
they are infants, adults, old persons, or people suffering from an incurable
disease. Moreover, human beings are not allowed to even ask for an act of killing
for themselves or for others. According to the core beliefs of Christianity,
killing someone for the good of others is a violation of the divine laws.
Killing is considered a crime against life, offense against human beings, and
an attack on humanity as a whole (Institute
of Clinical Bioethics, 2011).
Protestant
Denominations’ Position
Various protestant denominations often issue statements
on killing seriously ill patients. Groups with conservative faiths mostly show their opposition against these acts. While liberal denominations are
usually in favor of euthanasia. They believe that a person can decide to end
his or her life if the pain is unbearable or if the circumstances are critical.
Mixed thoughts are found on the non-voluntary or forced deaths of the patients
if they are seriously ill or dangerous for others.
2.3 Jewish Perspective
Jewish laws also strongly condemn the acts of
shortening anyone's life. The Jewish laws consider it murder if someone is
killed even after the doctors declare that someone will die in any event. Thus,
the Jewish beliefs acknowledge the sanctity of human life and do not support
any act of killing some patients either in his or her own interest or in the
interest of others (Institute of Clinical
Bioethics, 2011).
Conclusions
Thus, on the basis of the ethical and various
religious standards, it can be concluded the act of killing any person, who is
suffering even from an incurable disease, cannot be justified. Only a few
schools of thought support a voluntary death. Forced death is opposed by almost
all of the religions and ethical standards. Thus, it can be concluded from all
this discussion that it is unjust, illegal, and immoral to kill any patient who
is seriously ill. In the scenario of the current coronavirus outbreak, patients
may be kept in isolation wards if there is a possibility of the spread of the
disease. They may also be confined to particular areas. But, all the patients
must be provided with all the medical facilities unless they die with God’s
will. Any act of killing someone to avoid further spread of the disease is
unjust and illegal and must be condemned if it occurs in any part of the world.
Sources
Godlee, F. (2015). Assisted dying—time for a full and fair
debate. Retrieved 14 March 2020, from https://www.bmj.com/content/351/bmj.h4517
Institute of Clinical Bioethics. (2011). Religious
Perspectives On Euthanasia - Institute of Clinical Bioethics. Retrieved 14
March 2020, from
https://sites.sju.edu/icb/religious-perspectives-on-euthanasia/
Jamie, P. (2020). Could This Be the Deadliest Country For
Anyone Suspected With Coronavirus?. Retrieved 14 March 2020, from https://www.techtimes.com/articles/247610/20200226/north-korean-man-shot-dead-after-being-suspected-with-coronavirus.htm
Nunes, R., & Rego, G. (2016). Euthanasia: A Challenge to
Medical Ethics.
Worldometer. (2020). COVID-19 CORONAVIRUS OUTBREAK. Retrieved
14 March 2020, from https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Comments
Post a Comment