Ethical legal
problems arise when two conflicting arguments appear in a certain case. One
argument may be against the morals where the law is built and the other
argument pertains to the right of the individual in terms of emotions, physical
and means of survival. Abortion is one of these cases. In Spain, a proposed law
for abortion had stirred public protests. It defies tradition, religion and the
right to life, but it also violates the right to a safe decision of an
individual already existing in the legal system.
If you think
of it, public concern depends on what they define as lesser or necessary evils.
A necessary evil is something that lessens the suffering of parties involved in
a certain scenario. Euthanasia is also an ethical issue because medical
professionals and hospitals swore themselves to save the lives of people, but
if the victim asks to end their life, the lesser evil is to end the patient’s
life, but is contrast to the medical responsibility a doctor has.
However, if country
laws prioritize lesser or necessary evils, loopholes will exist everywhere.
Every person could just state that a person declared a right to die even
without the person actually saying it. It could be tools of murder hidden in
laws for people in power. With a few interjections of laws, they can protect themselves
by invoking these lesser evil or necessary evil situations.
It is difficult to ascertain the level of
objectivity and subjectivity laws should have to make a perfect legal system.
But in some cases, the answer is very much obvious when to go for the lesser
evil choice.
