Reading Time: 12 minutes

PHI-413V Case Study on Death and Dying: Guide + Example

The PHI-413V Case Study on Death and Dying is a 1,500–2,000-word APA paper that asks you to analyze George’s decision to consider voluntary euthanasia after being diagnosed with ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis) from the perspective of the Christian worldview and a second religion of your choosing. You must address how each worldview interprets George’s suffering, the value of his life, the ethics of euthanasia, and the morally justified options — then state your own position. This guide breaks down every required question, shows a fully worked example from the Christian perspective, and explains how to structure the comparative analysis so you can write a rubric-aligned paper with confidence.

What Is the Death and Dying Case Study About?

The case study presents George, a successful attorney in his mid-fifties diagnosed with ALS. As the disease progresses toward total paralysis and eventual death, George contemplates voluntary euthanasia to spare himself and his family prolonged suffering. The assignment asks you to analyze his situation ethically from two worldviews.

This is a high-stakes assignment (typically 200 points) that requires both ethical reasoning and genuine theological engagement. It builds directly on the bioethical framework you used in the Healing and Autonomy benchmark — the same four principles of principlism (autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, justice) apply, but now the central question shifts from parental decision-making to end-of-life choice.

The assignment requires APA format with an abstract, at least six references (three academic plus course readings, the Bible, and a primary source for the second religion), and a clearly stated personal position.

What Questions Must You Answer?

The rubric requires you to address six specific questions, each forming a section of your paper:

1. Suffering and fallenness — How would George interpret his suffering through the Christian narrative of the fallen world?
2. Hope of resurrection — How does the Christian hope of resurrection reframe George’s suffering?
3. Value of life — How does the Christian worldview inform George’s view of his life’s value despite ALS?
4. Euthanasia deliberation — What values and considerations would the Christian worldview focus on regarding euthanasia?
5. Morally justified options — What options are morally justified for George from the Christian worldview, and why?
6. Personal position — What decision would you make in George’s situation, and why?

For the comparative version, you answer these same questions from the perspective of a second religion (commonly Buddhism, Islam, or Hinduism) and compare the two worldviews’ conclusions.

How Do You Address Suffering and Fallenness?

You address suffering and fallenness by explaining the creation-fall narrative: God created the world good (Genesis 1:31), but sin introduced suffering, disease, and death (Romans 5:12). George’s ALS is not God’s punishment — it is a consequence of living in a broken world. This framing validates George’s grief without reducing his condition to a moral failing.

How Do You Address the Hope of Resurrection?

You address resurrection hope by explaining that Christ’s resurrection transforms death from a final defeat into a passage (1 Corinthians 15:54–55). George’s suffering is real, but it is not the last word — Paul wrote that “our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us” (Romans 8:18). This provides a reason to endure suffering with meaning, not a command to welcome it.

How Do You Argue the Value of George’s Life?

You argue for George’s inherent value through the doctrine of imago Dei (Genesis 1:27) — his worth is not contingent on physical ability, productivity, or independence. Even as ALS limits his body, his dignity as an image-bearer remains intact. This directly counters utilitarian arguments that would weigh cost against benefit to justify euthanasia.

How Do You Analyze the Euthanasia Question?

You analyze euthanasia by distinguishing between killing and allowing to die. The Christian tradition holds that only God has authority over life and death (Job 1:21; Psalm 139:16). Active euthanasia crosses a moral line, but declining extraordinary or disproportionate treatments is morally permissible (Kozakowski, 2024). George may choose palliative care and hospice without moral compromise — this is not euthanasia but compassionate stewardship of his remaining life (Sulmasy, 2021).

How Do You Choose and Compare a Second Religion?

You choose a second religion that is unfamiliar to you and genuinely engage with its worldview — not a surface-level summary. Strong options include:

• Buddhism — suffering (dukkha) is central; the response is detachment and acceptance, not divine intervention. Views on euthanasia vary by tradition.
• Islam — life is a trust from Allah; only Allah determines death. Euthanasia is generally prohibited, but views on withdrawing futile treatment vary.
• Hinduism — karma and dharma shape the understanding of suffering; euthanasia may interfere with karmic resolution.

For each religion, address the same six questions and use a primary source (e.g., the Pali Canon for Buddhism, the Quran for Islam, the Bhagavad Gita for Hinduism).

How Is the Death and Dying Case Study Graded?

The rubric rewards depth of engagement, accurate representation of both worldviews, and a clearly justified personal position. Key criteria include:

• All six questions addressed with specific theological and ethical reasoning.
• Accurate worldview representation — the second religion must be described using its own sources, not filtered through a Christian lens.
• Clear distinction between ethical reasoning and worldview considerations.
• APA format with abstract, in-text citations, and a reference list with at least six sources.
• Personal position stated with genuine justification, not a generic statement.

PHI-413V Case Study on Death and Dying Example

For Reference Use Only: This worked sample is provided as a study reference and example only. Need a custom Death and Dying case study written to your own rubric and second-religion comparison? Reach out to us on WhatsApp for a fast response. Message us on WhatsApp: +1 564-544-6924

 

Case Study on Death and Dying

[Student Name]

College of Nursing and Health Care Professions, Grand Canyon University

PHI-413V: Ethical and Spiritual Decision Making in Health Care

[Instructor Name]

[Due Date]

 

Abstract

This paper presents an ethical analysis of George’s decision to consider voluntary euthanasia after being diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). The analysis is conducted from the perspective of the Christian worldview, examining how the Christian narrative interprets suffering through the fallenness of creation and the hope of resurrection. The paper explores how George’s life retains inherent value as a person created in the image of God, evaluates the ethical considerations surrounding euthanasia from a Christian perspective, and identifies morally justified alternatives.

The analysis draws on the principles of biomedical ethics and Christian theological resources to argue that while George’s suffering is real and deeply consequential, the Christian worldview offers a framework that upholds the sanctity of life while advocating for compassionate end-of-life care.

Case Study on Death and Dying

The diagnosis of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) confronts George with one of the most profound questions a human being can face: whether life remains worth living when the body progressively fails. ALS is a neurodegenerative disease that destroys motor neurons, leading to paralysis, loss of speech and swallowing, respiratory failure, and ultimately death, typically within two to five years of diagnosis.

George, a successful attorney and devoted family man in his mid-fifties, now faces the prospect of total physical dependence and is considering voluntary euthanasia as a way to avoid prolonged suffering. This paper analyzes George’s situation from the perspective of the Christian worldview, addressing how the Christian narrative interprets suffering, the value of human life, the ethics of euthanasia, and the morally justified options available to him.

Suffering and the Fallenness of the World

Within the Christian narrative, George would interpret his suffering as a consequence of living in a fallen world rather than as a punishment from God. The Bible teaches that God created the world in a state of original goodness (Genesis 1:31), but the entry of sin through the fall introduced suffering, decay, and death into the human experience (Romans 5:12; Romans 8:22). ALS, like all disease, is understood not as God’s targeted affliction but as part of the broader brokenness that characterizes post-fall existence.

This theological framing does not minimize George’s pain; rather, it places it within a narrative that acknowledges suffering as real, unjust in its distribution, and contrary to God’s original design. The Christian understanding of the fall thus validates George’s grief without reducing his condition to a moral failing.

Suffering and the Hope of Resurrection

The Christian narrative also offers George a framework of hope that extends beyond his present suffering. The resurrection of Jesus Christ is the central event in Christian theology, and it transforms the meaning of death from a final defeat into a passage toward restoration (1 Corinthians 15:54–55). For George, this means that his ALS, while devastating, does not have the last word.

The Apostle Paul wrote that “our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us” (Romans 8:18), a passage that frames temporal suffering within the context of eternal hope. This does not obligate George to welcome his suffering, but it does provide a reason to endure it with meaning—his suffering participates in the broader Christian narrative of redemption and ultimate restoration (Sulmasy, 2021).

The Value of George’s Life as a Person

The Christian worldview holds that George’s life possesses inherent, unconditional value because he is created in the image of God—the doctrine of imago Dei (Genesis 1:27). This value is not contingent on productivity, physical ability, or quality of life as measured by functional independence. Even as ALS progressively limits George’s body, his dignity as an image-bearer remains fully intact.

This stands in contrast to utilitarian frameworks that might weigh the burden of George’s care against its perceived benefits and conclude that euthanasia is rational. From a Christian perspective, reducing human worth to a cost-benefit calculation fundamentally misunderstands what it means to be a person. George’s relationships, his capacity for love and prayer, and his witness to others who are suffering all retain deep value even—and perhaps especially—in the midst of his decline (Beauchamp & Childress, 2025).

Christian Deliberation on Euthanasia

The Christian worldview raises serious objections to voluntary euthanasia on multiple grounds. First, the sanctity-of-life principle holds that only God, as the author of life, has the authority to determine when life ends (Job 1:21; Psalm 139:16). Intentionally ending one’s own life or requesting that a physician do so usurps a prerogative that belongs to God alone. Second, the principle of nonmaleficence—central to both Christian ethics and biomedical ethics—prohibits the intentional taking of innocent human life (Beauchamp & Childress, 2025).

Third, the Christian tradition draws a critical distinction between killing and allowing to die: withdrawing extraordinary or disproportionate medical interventions when death is imminent is morally permissible, but actively administering a lethal agent is not (Kozakowski, 2024). Euthanasia, even when motivated by compassion, crosses this line.

At the same time, the Christian worldview does not demand that George pursue every possible life-sustaining treatment regardless of burden. The Catholic and broader Christian tradition of ordinary versus extraordinary means recognizes that a patient is not morally obligated to accept treatments that are excessively burdensome, painful, or futile (Kozakowski, 2024). George may, in good conscience, decline aggressive interventions and choose palliative care focused on comfort and dignity. This is not euthanasia; it is a morally distinct choice to allow the natural course of the disease while ensuring that suffering is managed compassionately.

Morally Justified Options

Given the Christian worldview, the morally justified options for George include accepting palliative care and hospice services that address pain, maintain dignity, and support his family; continuing to engage in meaningful relationships and spiritual practices for as long as he is able; and declining extraordinary treatments that offer no reasonable benefit. George may also benefit from pastoral care, a faith community that walks with him through his illness, and a spiritual needs assessment that helps his care team integrate his values into his treatment plan. What is not morally justified, from this perspective, is the active, intentional ending of his life through euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide (Sulmasy, 2021).

Personal Reflection

If I were in George’s situation, I would choose to forgo euthanasia and pursue comprehensive palliative care. This decision would be grounded in the belief that life is a gift from God whose value does not diminish with physical decline, and that suffering, while deeply unwelcome, can be met with meaning, community, and hope. I would seek hospice care to ensure comfort, lean on my faith community for support, and trust that my life continues to matter to God and to the people who love me—even when I can no longer demonstrate that value in ways the world typically measures.

References

Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (2025). Principles of biomedical ethics (9th ed.). Oxford University Press.

Kozakowski, J. L. (2024). Catholic teaching: A middle ground and guide for end-of-life care and decision-making and an antidote for dying badly in America. The Linacre Quarterly, 91(1), 52–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/00243639221141230

Sulmasy, D. P. (2021). Physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia: Theological and ethical responses. Christian Bioethics: Non-Ecumenical Studies in Medical Morality, 27(3), 223–227. https://doi.org/10.1093/cb/cbab015

Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture quotations are from the New International Version (NIV).

Common Mistakes to Avoid

• Treating the second religion superficially — one paragraph on Buddhism is not a comparative analysis.
• Confusing killing with allowing to die — the rubric expects you to distinguish active euthanasia from declining extraordinary treatment.
• Omitting Scripture references in the Christian sections.
• Skipping the abstract, which is explicitly required.
• Writing a personal position without justification — “I would not choose euthanasia” needs a rationale grounded in your worldview.

Other GCU RN-to-BSN Course Guides

Taking other courses this term? We have complete assignment guides with worked examples for every major GCU RN-to-BSN course:

• HLT-362V Applied Statistics for Health Care — every assignment with worked examples, Excel formulas, and APA papers covering descriptive statistics, sampling distributions, article analysis, and correlation vs. causation.

More course guides publishing soon — bookmark this page or message us on WhatsApp to get notified.

PHI-413V Case Study on Death and Dying FAQ

What is the Death and Dying case study about?

The case study is about George, a man in his mid-fifties diagnosed with ALS who is considering voluntary euthanasia. You analyze his situation from the Christian worldview and a second religion, addressing suffering, the value of life, and the ethics of euthanasia.

How long should the Death and Dying paper be?

The paper should be 1,500 to 2,000 words in APA format with an abstract. You need at least six references: three academic sources, course readings, the Bible, and a primary source for the second religion.

What second religion should I choose?

Choose a religion that is unfamiliar to you, such as Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism, Shintoism, or Baha’i. Engage genuinely with its worldview using a primary source, and address all six questions from that perspective as well.

Does Christianity support euthanasia?

The mainstream Christian position holds that active euthanasia violates the sanctity of life and God’s sole authority over life and death. However, Christianity does permit declining extraordinary or disproportionate treatments and choosing palliative care focused on comfort and dignity.

Do I need an abstract for this assignment?

Yes, the assignment explicitly requires an abstract. It should summarize the purpose of the paper, the two worldviews compared, and the main conclusions of your ethical analysis in approximately 150–250 words.

About the Author

This guide was prepared by the Gradevia academic team, specialists in nursing and health-sciences coursework support for students at GCU, WGU, Walden, and Liberty University. Our writers hold graduate degrees in nursing, public health, bioethics, and theology. We focus on helping busy working nurses understand the method, not just the answer.

Article Update Log

• June 19, 2026 — Initial publication. Guide to PHI-413V Case Study on Death and Dying: George’s ALS and euthanasia analyzed from the Christian worldview, all six rubric questions addressed, second-religion comparison guidance, a fully worked APA paper with verified references (Beauchamp & Childress, 2025; Sulmasy, 2021; Kozakowski, 2024), grading notes, and FAQ.