Just War Theory, Essay Example

Just war theory seeks to justify the act of war and the forms of war. The theory lays emphasis on the reasons for engaging in warfare activities and is the moral and legal justification sought to the resolution to fight. The theory takes two approaches in the in categorizing the requirements of a just war.

Zupan (2004) states that the main criterion that is essential is justifying the right to go to work or the Jus ad bellum. A just cause of war has been the most essential component of war justification. The right to go to war must come from a competent or just authority in order to be justified. The authority must have a distinction of justice in order to resort to war. The war must center on a justifiable cause. In view, of Zupan (2004) the justification of the need to go to war based on legitimate and extreme cases where the cause of war can be justified. The resolution to go to war must be the last resort in circumstances where no other option is available. All other means of resolutions explored in order to justify the engagement in war being the last resolution.

The intention of engaging in war must be right and act as the limitation of the extent of war. The outcome of the war must result in a reasonable success outcome. The result of the war must be efficient desirable and not regressive the war must result in achievements of desired objectives. The desires of fighting the war must be proportionate to the means of the war. The outcome must be of a greater value compared to the means of the war otherwise the war cannot be justified.

Euthanasia

The difference between involuntary and involuntary euthanasia is that while voluntary euthanasia requires the individual’s consent involuntary euthanasia does not require consent from the individual. For voluntary euthanasia, the individual consent sought, but involuntary euthanasia the consent is not necessary. According to Medina (2004), a patient who requests to stop a life support machine while being fully aware of the resulting death considered voluntary euthanasia. A patient in a coma cannot give consent for euthanasia; therefore, involuntary euthanasia carried out.

Active euthanasia, on the other hand, involves the taking of measures to achieve euthanasia for instance the use of drugs or poison to cause death (Medina 2004). Passive euthanasia results where an act deliberately neglected that result in death, and results in the failure to resuscitate. The withdrawal of medication in order to result in death is an example of passive euthanasia.  The dissimilarity between the two is that active euthanasia requires doing something to cause death, but passive euthanasia involves not doing something that result in death.

The conviction of John Kevorkian based on voluntary, active euthanasia. The euthanasia performed by the doctor was after the consent of the patient obtained, as the choice was the patients wish. The individual wishing euthanasia controlled the machine, which the doctor used for euthanasia, therefore, the concept of consent was key. The method used in performing euthanasia was an active approach since there were substances used to cause death. The euthanasia in the case was voluntary euthanasia using the active procedure of execution.

References

Medina, L. M. (2004). Euthanasia. Greenhaven Press.

Zupan, D. S. (2004). War morality and autonomy: An investigation in just war theory. Ashgate Publishing.