Women's Rights, Animal Rights and Euthanasia Paper Example

Introduction

The issues of human rights, animal rights, and mercy killing are ones that constantly raise various ethical, legal, and moral questions in everyday American life. It is these moral and legal problems that Octavio Roca discusses and analyzes in the three successive chapters of her book titled "An Examined Life: Critical Thinking and Ethics Today." The main point across chapters six, seven, and eight is that despite the interplay between law and ethics, the moral argument should always be used in justifying women's rights as human rights, the equality of women, animal rights, and assisted suicide and euthanasia.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Women's Rights are Human Rights

In chapter six, the author discusses the historical unequal treatment of women, the utilitarian arguments for women's rights, and struggle for the right of women in the U.S. One of the most important points that Roca (2016) makes at the outset of this chapter is that even though women are not a minority group, they have historically been treated as second-class citizens. According to Boca (2016), because of this unfortunate historical fact, there is a cause for political and moral concern or introspection about women's equality rights. Evidence from the U.S. Census Bureau Statistics validates this argument. Another important point that Roca (2016) makes is that in spite of historical efforts made to assure equality between men and women such as the enactment of the 1963 Equal Pay Act and the failed attempts to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment back in the 70s, unequal treatment of women still subsists. Analytically, Roca's (2016) arguments hold water since research consistently show that socioeconomic and political gaps still exist between American men and women.

Next, Roca (2016) introduces the utilitarian argument for the equality of women whereby she posits that equality benefits everyone in society. Essentially, the author is right since equality maximizes happiness and pleasure by ensuring that all members of society have access to equal rights and resources. Further, delving into feminism, Roca (2016) argues that for many American women, the promise of equality remains a deferred dream since many efforts to guarantee them equal rights with men have historically hit a snug. Additionally, Roca (2016) makes a moral case for abortion in America by analyzing women's reproductive rights under Roe v. Wade decision in 1973. Using this landmark case as a moral ground to justify equal rights for women, the author argues that women should enjoy the same rights with men in other spheres of life such as politics, employment, and education without unreasonable restrictions from the state.

Animal Rights: Humans and Other Living Creatures

In chapter seven, Roca (2016) explains and evaluates the criterion for the denial or extension of rights to animals, the ethical issues pertaining to the application of animals for scientific research and product testing, the utilitarian argument for animal rights, and the claims for and against animal rights. One of the major points made by the author in this chapter is that in analyzing the moral status of animals, the two main questions to be asked is whether animals possess any rights, to begin with, and how they should be used or treated by humans. According to Roca (2016), the main criterion used in the establishment of animal rights is that of rights being based on having a soul as argued by Rene Descartes. The author juxtaposes this position with other arguments by Immanuel Kant and other philosophers that the foundations of rights are pleasure, pain, or rationality. However, Roca (2016) concludes that since it is impossible to ascertain whether or not animals have a soul, the view by Rene Descartes is untenable. Instead, the author argues that the analysis of the rational status of animals by Kant is a better explanation of animal rights since it is possible to quantify and measure rationality. According to Roca (2016), it is this rationality view that is currently being used in the US.

The other point that Roca (2016) makes is that though human beings use animals for various uses such as for food, clothing, hunting, protection, and scientific research, these uses raise various ethical issues regarding animal rights and abuse of these rights by man. Further, according to her, in evaluating the claim for animal rights, it is instructive to consider the utilitarian argument which turns on the morality of using and treating animals in ways that would be considered a violation of human rights if they were to be done to humans. Roca (2016) is thus right in arguing that in determining whether or not animals should have equal rights with humans, it is necessary to incorporate the utilitarian school of moral philosophy associated with Jeremy Bentham since it is only through a moral rather than a legal sense that we can grant animals some rights. Even if people cannot accept that animals have rights because they lack the ability to think rationally and be self-aware, they should minimize their pain and suffering.

Whose Life Is It Anyway? Euthanasia, Assisted Suicide, Suicide

In this chapter, Roca (2016) discusses the morality of assisted suicide and mercy killing, how the morality and legality of end-of-life care are related, and the Kantian and utilitarian arguments regarding euthanasia, assisted suicide, and suicide. One of the points made by the author is that even though the legality and morality of mercy killing and assisted suicide are still debatable, in the US, do not resuscitate (DNR) orders are legal and commonly used in hospitals. The basis of this practice is the fact that every individual is a sovereign over himself, his own body and mind. On the issue of whether doctors may end life, Roca (2016) states that except for states that have "Death with Dignity" statutes, killing is illegal.

Another other point made by the author is that based on Kant and Mill's individual liberty and utilitarian concepts, euthanasia, assisted suicide, and suicide may be legally and morally justified. The utilitarian justification is that these practices help in minimizing pain while maximizing happiness and pleasure. However, when it comes to euthanasia, doctors have to distinguish between active and passive euthanasia. The major moral distinction between the two is that active euthanasia involves directly killing someone while passive euthanasia entails letting someone die, the former being considered morally worse than the latter. However, Roca (2016) is of the opinion that the difference between the two concepts does not make one much less moral than the other and hence while physicians must discriminate between active and passive euthanasia to be compliant with the law, they cannot do more than this.

Conclusion

To summarize, the main point in chapter seven of Octavio Roca book is that even though women have historically been treated less equally than men in the American society, their rights should be considered as human rights as this is the moral and ethical thing to do to promote everyone's happiness and advancement. Further, under chapter seven, Roca (2016) makes a case for the equal treatment of animals and humans by arguing that even though animals may not pass the rationality criterion for determining possession of rights, they have the capacity to feel pain, hence the need to afford them some rights. Finally, the author's main point in chapter eight is that the utilitarian moral philosophy should be used as the basis for determining the ethicality, morality, and legality of suicide, assisted suicide, and euthanasia. The central theme across these three chapters, however, is that in considering all these issues, moral and ethical arguments should always take precedence.

Reference

Roca, O. (2016). Examined life: Critical thinking and ethics today. New York: PearsonEducation (US).