Euthanasia on the battlefield

[choy]

just curious about this. what if you’re on the battlefield with someone. a mortar or some explosive hit near you and you’re okay but the other guy is mortally wounded. he’s bleeding but still alive. he could probably be saved if you’re near a medical facility, but you’re not. its chaos because of the bombardment and you can’t spot a medic. the other guy can’t walk and probably moving him is not the best course of action as he may bleed more.

he’s going to die anyway. not immediately, he may last an hour or so.

so is euthanasia acceptable in this circumstance? can you just shoot him in the head rather than let him bleed slowly to death? or perhaps get hit by more bombs and maimed further

 

[lynx]

Can he still fire a gun? If he thinks he can still contribute to the cause then he should live by all means. If he thinks he can’t and wants to die then shoot him. This is all based on the assumption that outside hope is lost.

 

[Jermosh]

Shoot him in the head, yes that is always wrong. Dope him up on morphine to remove the pain till he dies, thats not always wrong.

 

[choy]

Shoot him in the head, yes that is always wrong. Dope him up on morphine to remove the pain till he dies, thats not always wrong.

thats a good idea, assuming both of you carry enogh morphine

what if there’s not other way to alleviate the pain? death is inevitable either through infection or bleeding. he’s dying a slow and painful death

 

[vera_dicere]

So he’s going to last an hour? Did the unit’s medic get killed in the battle? At least the other soliders should have some first aid training.

Regardless, no offence to soliders, but if they go out on the battlefield in a war, they know the risks, they know the risk of getting their legs blown off or sustaining horrific injuries. This is going to sound cold, but why waste the bullet? Why waste the morphine when it could be used later for soliders who you do want to save or can be saved?

I’d have to say no, all up, because really, who’s to say that as your clocking your rifle to put a bullet in his brain that the medic is less than five minutes away? It might not go down well with the chain of command if you shot a solider that they’ve spent all that money on training and equiping just because you felt bad for the guy.

 

[Orleans_Attny]

just curious about this. what if you’re on the battlefield with someone. a mortar or some explosive hit near you and you’re okay but the other guy is mortally wounded. he’s bleeding but still alive. he could probably be saved if you’re near a medical facility, but you’re not. its chaos because of the bombardment and you can’t spot a medic. the other guy can’t walk and probably moving him is not the best course of action as he may bleed more.

he’s going to die anyway. not immediately, he may last an hour or so.

so is euthanasia acceptable in this circumstance? can you just shoot him in the head rather than let him bleed slowly to death? or perhaps get hit by more bombs and maimed further

Well, this military officer thinks that under no circumstances is is morally, ethically, or legally permissible to euthanize a solider on the battlefield (or anywhere else). That the solider is suffering and likely to die is unfortunate and irrelevant.

Let me say that again: Never.

If there is any place in the world where morals should be entirely inflexible it is on the field of battle because when you’re there you aren’t standing on a slipperly slope, you’re teetering on the precipice of a cliff.

Any member of the forces who unjustifiably kills another person should stand before a courts-martial to account for his or her behavior.

Pax,
OA

 

[PaulinVA]

Well, this military officer think that under no circumstances is is morally, ethically, or legally permissible to euthanize a solider on the battlefield (or anywhere else) simply because they are suffering and likely to die.

Never. If there is any place in the world where morals should be entirely inflexible it is on the field of battle; because there you aren’t standing on a slipperly slope, you’re standing on the edge of a cliff.

Anyone who does so should stand before a courts-martial to account for his or her behavior.

Pax,
OA

Yeah, what my attorney said.

 

[Jermosh]

thats a good idea, assuming both of you carry enogh morphine

what if there’s not other way to alleviate the pain? death is inevitable either through infection or bleeding. he’s dying a slow and painful death

I think morphine is pretty common in the battlefield, I could be wrong though. But no it would never be right to just kill someone, even in battle and certain death.

 

[choy]

So he’s going to last an hour? Did the unit’s medic get killed in the battle? At least the other soliders should have some first aid training.

Regardless, no offence to soliders, but if they go out on the battlefield in a war, they know the risks, they know the risk of getting their legs blown off or sustaining horrific injuries. This is going to sound cold, but why waste the bullet? Why waste the morphine when it could be used later for soliders who you do want to save or can be saved?

I’d have to say no, all up, because really, who’s to say that as your clocking your rifle to put a bullet in his brain that the medic is less than five minutes away? It might not go down well with the chain of command if you shot a solider that they’ve spent all that money on training and equiping just because you felt bad for the guy.

my situation would entail that help is just not possible. perhaps there’s heavy gunfire pinning everyone down, and you’re somewhat isolated from the other guys. there’s just two of you.

 

[Jermosh]

my situation would entail that help is just not possible. perhaps there’s heavy gunfire pinning everyone down, and you’re somewhat isolated from the other guys. there’s just two of you.

So how do you know they are going to die then? Most likely they are not medic trained, and they would not have time to actually come to that conclusion if they were under that enviroment.

In the end, the direct killing of any human is always a grave act, there are some exceptions and this is not one of them.

 

[Orleans_Attny]

my situation would entail that help is just not possible. perhaps there’s heavy gunfire pinning everyone down, and you’re somewhat isolated from the other guys. there’s just two of you.

You can make the hypothetical as dire and hopeless as you wish, but it doesn’t change the only moral, ethical, and legal answer.

It’s never, ever, acceptable.

Despite popular hand-wringing to the contrary, “No” is a real answer.

Pax,
OA

 

[o_mlly]

he’s going to die anyway. not immediately, he may last an hour or so.

You also are “going to die anyway. not immediately, [you] may last an hour [or thirty years] or so …”

so is euthanasia acceptable in this circumstance? can you just shoot him in the head rather than let him bleed slowly to death? or perhaps get hit by more bombs and maimed further

Why not shoot yourself in the head? Love your neighbor as yourself. Doesn’t your illogic apply to both of you differentiated only by degree (time), not kind. Of course, you may not shoot him or you!

 

[cargau]

You describe a most unfortunate, yet realistic situation in times of war.

One may never deliberately take action to end another’s life. Perhaps, the medic is only minutes away as another poster suggested, but more importantly, perhaps a Priest is only minutes away.

Those last few minutes may be all that’s needed to secure his place in heaven through the graces of Sacrament and conversion.

No one ever has the right to stand between a soul and his God…

 

[Newbie2]

You can make the hypothetical as dire and hopeless as you wish, but it doesn’t change the only moral, ethical, and legal answer.

It’s never, ever, acceptable.

Despite popular hand-wringing to the contrary, “No” is a real answer.

Pax,
OA

Yep. Not much more to say on the subject.

 

[kimmielittle]

You describe a most unfortunate, yet realistic situation in times of war.

One may never deliberately take action to end another’s life. Perhaps, the medic is only minutes away as another poster suggested, but more importantly, perhaps a Priest is only minutes away.

Those last few minutes may be all that’s needed to secure his place in heaven through the graces of Sacrament and conversion.

No one ever has the right to stand between a soul and his God…

 

[Victorious]

Reminds me of an old law school hypothetical: if a guy jumps off the roof, and you shoot and kill him as he rushes past your window, are you guilty of murder? Answer: yes. Even though his death was immanent and inevitable, you unjustly deprived him of the remaining seconds of life he would otherwise have had; and the cause of his death was directly traceable to your unjustified action.

As I have said in another thread, it takes a failure of belief in the life to come to find euthanasia or suicide acceptable. So far from releasing the sufferer from agony, you could be sending him (or yourself) to eternal suffering.

O time despised during life! you will be ardently desired by worldlings at the hour of death. They will then wish for another year, another month, another day; but they will not obtain it: they will then be told that time shall be no longer. How much would they then pay for another week, or another day, to settle the accounts of their conscience? To obtain a single hour, they would, says St. Laurence Justinian, give all their wealth and worldly possessions. But this hour shall not be given.

St. Alphonsus Liguori, Preparation for Death​

 

[Redratfish]

You call a medic, even if there isn’t one near by. Patch him up, and do what you can.

How ****** an ending would “Saving Private Ryan” had if Ryan shot the Captain in the head. Mercy killing is never justified.