How Might A Kantian Deontologist Evaluate Assisted Suicide

The debate surrounding assisted suicide is rife with ethical complexities, touching upon fundamental values such as autonomy, dignity, and the sanctity of life. Immanuel Kant's deontological ethics, with its emphasis on duty, universalizability, and respect for persons, provides a unique framework for evaluating the morality of assisted suicide. This article explores how a Kantian deontologist might approach this sensitive issue, delving into the core principles of Kantian ethics and their application to the act of assisted suicide.

Kantian Ethics: A Primer

Before evaluating assisted suicide through a Kantian lens, it's crucial to understand the foundational principles of Kantian ethics. Unlike consequentialist theories that focus on the outcomes of actions, Kantian deontology judges the morality of an action based on its adherence to moral duties and principles, regardless of its consequences.

The Good Will

At the heart of Kantian ethics lies the concept of the good will. Kant argues that the only thing that is unconditionally good is the good will, which he defines as the will that acts out of duty, motivated by respect for the moral law. Actions are morally worthy only when they are performed out of duty, not inclination or self-interest.

The Categorical Imperative

The categorical imperative is the supreme principle of morality in Kantian ethics. It is a command of reason that dictates what we ought to do, regardless of our desires or circumstances. Kant formulates the categorical imperative in several ways, each offering a different perspective on moral duty:

• The Formula of Universal Law: Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law. This formulation requires us to consider whether the principle underlying our action could be consistently willed as a universal law applicable to everyone. If the universalization of the maxim leads to a contradiction or undermines the very possibility of acting on that maxim, then the action is morally impermissible.
• The Formula of Humanity as an End in Itself: Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an end. This formulation emphasizes the inherent dignity and worth of all rational beings. It prohibits us from treating others (or ourselves) simply as instruments to achieve our own purposes. We must always respect their autonomy and rationality.
• The Formula of Autonomy: Act only so that the will could regard itself as giving universal law through its maxim. This formulation highlights the importance of autonomy and self-legislation. It emphasizes that moral laws should be self-imposed, arising from our own rational will, rather than imposed upon us by external authorities or desires.

Duty vs. Inclination

Kant distinguishes between actions performed out of duty and actions performed out of inclination. Actions performed out of inclination are motivated by desires, emotions, or self-interest. While such actions may be aligned with moral duties, they lack moral worth because they are not motivated by respect for the moral law. Only actions performed out of duty, motivated by the good will, are truly morally praiseworthy.

Autonomy and Rationality

Autonomy and rationality are central to Kant's conception of moral agency. Autonomy refers to the capacity of rational beings to govern themselves according to reason, free from external coercion or internal desires. Rationality is the capacity to reason logically and make judgments based on objective principles. Kant believes that autonomy and rationality are the foundations of human dignity and moral responsibility.

Applying Kantian Ethics to Assisted Suicide

Now, let's examine how a Kantian deontologist might evaluate assisted suicide, considering the principles outlined above. The analysis involves considering the permissibility of assisted suicide under each of the formulations of the categorical imperative and exploring the potential conflicts and challenges that arise.

Universalizability

The first step is to examine whether the maxim underlying assisted suicide can be universalized without contradiction. The maxim might be formulated as: "It is permissible to end one's life when suffering from an incurable and unbearable illness."

A Kantian might argue that universalizing this maxim could lead to several contradictions:

• Contradiction in Conception: If everyone were allowed to end their life when suffering, it could undermine the value of life itself. If life is not inherently valuable, then the very act of choosing to end it becomes meaningless. Furthermore, if society widely accepted assisted suicide, it could erode the commitment to providing care and support for the vulnerable and suffering.
• Contradiction in the Will: A rational person might not be able to will that everyone should be allowed to end their life, even when suffering. This is because a rational person generally wills their own preservation and well-being. To will the universalization of assisted suicide would be to will a state of affairs in which one's own life could be ended, which contradicts the natural inclination to preserve oneself.

However, a Kantian could also argue for a more nuanced interpretation. The maxim could be formulated more specifically to avoid these contradictions: "It is permissible for a competent adult, suffering from an incurable and unbearable illness that causes persistent and intolerable pain, and who has made a voluntary and informed decision, to end their life with the assistance of a physician."

This more specific maxim addresses some of the concerns about the value of life and the protection of the vulnerable. It limits the scope of assisted suicide to cases where the individual is competent, informed, and suffering from extreme and intractable pain. Universalizing this maxim might not necessarily lead to a contradiction, as it applies only to a very specific set of circumstances.

Treating Humanity as an End

The second formulation of the categorical imperative requires us to treat humanity, whether in our own person or in the person of any other, never merely as a means to an end, but always at the same time as an end. This principle raises complex questions about the morality of both seeking and providing assistance in suicide.

The Individual Seeking Assisted Suicide: A Kantian might argue that choosing assisted suicide does not necessarily treat oneself merely as a means. If the individual is suffering from an incurable and unbearable illness, and their quality of life has deteriorated to the point where they can no longer exercise their autonomy and rationality, then choosing to end their life could be seen as an act of self-respect and a way of affirming their dignity. It could be argued that continuing to live in such a state would be treating oneself as a mere means to prolonging biological existence, rather than respecting one's autonomy and rationality.

The Physician Providing Assistance: The role of the physician in assisted suicide is particularly complex from a Kantian perspective. On one hand, providing assistance could be seen as treating the patient merely as a means to end their suffering. The physician's skills and knowledge are being used to facilitate the patient's death, which could be interpreted as instrumentalizing the patient for the sake of alleviating their pain.

On the other hand, a Kantian could argue that providing assistance is an act of respecting the patient's autonomy and dignity. If the patient has made a voluntary and informed decision to end their life, then the physician's role is to help them exercise their autonomy and achieve their desired end. By providing assistance, the physician is acknowledging the patient's inherent worth as a rational being and respecting their right to make choices about their own life and death.

It's crucial to emphasize that the physician's motivation must be rooted in respect for the patient's autonomy, not in personal gain or a desire to alleviate their own discomfort. The physician must act out of a sense of duty to uphold the patient's rights and dignity, not out of inclination or self-interest.

Autonomy and Rationality in the Context of Suffering

The principles of autonomy and rationality are central to the Kantian evaluation of assisted suicide. However, the context of suffering can complicate the application of these principles. When individuals are suffering from severe pain, depression, or other debilitating conditions, their capacity for rational decision-making may be compromised.

A Kantian would insist that the individual seeking assisted suicide must be competent and capable of making a voluntary and informed decision. This requires ensuring that the individual is free from coercion, undue influence, or psychological impairments that could impair their judgment. It also requires providing the individual with complete and accurate information about their condition, prognosis, and alternative treatment options.

However, determining whether an individual is truly autonomous and rational in the face of extreme suffering can be challenging. Pain, depression, and other symptoms can cloud judgment and distort perceptions. A Kantian would advocate for a rigorous assessment process, involving multiple evaluations by qualified professionals, to ensure that the individual's decision is truly autonomous and rational.

Furthermore, a Kantian would emphasize the importance of addressing any underlying psychological or emotional issues that may be contributing to the individual's desire for assisted suicide. Depression, anxiety, and feelings of hopelessness can often be treated effectively, and addressing these issues may change the individual's perspective and alleviate their desire to end their life.

Potential Objections and Counterarguments

The Kantian perspective on assisted suicide is not without its challenges and objections. Here are some potential counterarguments and how a Kantian might respond:

• The Slippery Slope Argument: Critics argue that legalizing assisted suicide could lead to a slippery slope, where the criteria for eligibility are gradually expanded, and vulnerable individuals are pressured to end their lives. A Kantian would acknowledge this concern and emphasize the importance of establishing strict safeguards and regulations to prevent abuse. However, they would argue that the possibility of abuse does not necessarily invalidate the moral permissibility of assisted suicide in carefully defined circumstances.
• The Sanctity of Life Argument: Some argue that all human life is sacred and inviolable, and that intentionally ending a life is always morally wrong. A Kantian would respond that the sanctity of life should not be interpreted as an absolute and unconditional prohibition against ending one's life. Rather, it should be understood as a principle that requires us to respect the inherent dignity and worth of all human beings. In certain circumstances, respecting an individual's autonomy and dignity may require allowing them to make their own choices about their life and death, even if those choices involve ending their life.
• The Role of Compassion: Some argue that compassion requires us to do everything possible to alleviate suffering, including providing assistance in suicide. A Kantian would agree that compassion is an important moral emotion, but they would argue that compassion should not override the principles of duty and respect for persons. Compassion should be tempered by reason and a commitment to upholding moral principles.

Conclusion

Evaluating assisted suicide through a Kantian lens reveals the complexities and nuances of this ethical dilemma. While Kantian ethics places a strong emphasis on the value of life, the importance of upholding universal moral principles, and the duty to respect others, it also recognizes the importance of autonomy, rationality, and the inherent dignity of each individual.

A Kantian deontologist might argue that assisted suicide is morally permissible in certain narrowly defined circumstances, where the individual is competent, informed, suffering from an incurable and unbearable illness, and has made a voluntary decision based on their own rational will. However, they would also emphasize the importance of establishing strict safeguards and regulations to prevent abuse, protecting the vulnerable, and ensuring that the decision is truly autonomous and informed.

Ultimately, the Kantian perspective on assisted suicide highlights the ongoing tension between competing moral values and the need for careful deliberation and reasoned judgment in addressing this sensitive issue. The application of Kantian principles requires a deep understanding of the nuances of each individual case and a commitment to upholding the dignity and autonomy of all persons.