Pro Euthanasia Pros And Cons Essay

Euthanasia is a deliberate intentional act of an individual to end the life of another individual in order to relieve them from intractable suffering (QUT,2017). This term is often perceived in different ways. Most common three includes - a)Voluntary euthanasia: performed to end one's life with their consent, here the person is competent.For example; physician injects the suffering patient with lethal substance after being requested (QUT,2017) b) Non-Voluntary Euthanasia: performed when the person is not competent. For example; physician injecting the patient with lethal substance under the unresponsive state in post-coma (QUT,2017) c)Involuntary Euthanasia: performed when a patient is competent but has not requested their death wish. For example; performed when patiently is at

Euthanasia is the practice of purposefully ending someone’s life in order to relieve their pain and/or suffering. Euthanasia is legal in many countries including Belgium, France, India, Japan, and few states

“Dying is not a crime” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Kevorkian#cite_note-5) said Jack Kevorkian who’s a right-to-die activist. He claimed to have helped at least 130 patients to end their life after having his medical license taken away because he advertised himself as physician consultant for "death counseling”. He did so by letting the individuals take the final action using his “death machine” by pressing a button that would release toxins into their body. This is done so after Kevorkian helped attach the euthanasia device into his patients. After 8 years in prison he left on parole, and served

Euthanasia is the act of ending a persons life in order to prevent further suffering. There are three different types of euthanasia;

During World War II many horrible events took place such as the Holocaust but there are many more specific projects or events that happened such as the Euthanasia Project or otherwise known as Project Aktion T4. The Euthanasia Project was a program of mass murder that took place even the before the actual events of the Holocaust. Hitler had the objective to eliminate those who don’t contribute to the perfect society that he wanted. That included any adults with any minor or major disabilities along with children under any kind of illness. The Euthanasia Project had positives in the sense that at the time in the eyes of Germany or Hitler these were considered positives. But at the same time this project had its flaws that led to the ultimate

On May 6th 1997, Dr. Nancy Morrison was charged with the first-degree murder of Paul Mills by the means of non-voluntary active euthanasia. Paul Mills was a terminally ill patient who suffered from esophageal cancer. In October of 1996, Mr. Mills had undergone nine surgeries as the result of a post-surgical infection (Fisher, p. 262). As the infection progressed, a Do Not Resuscitate order was put in effect and his family made the decision to withdraw life-sustaining treatment, which should consequently cause a natural death to occur, known as passive euthanasia (Fisher, p. 191). However, Mr. Mills did not then die as expected. His attending nurse Elizabeth Bland-MacInnes described him as suffering and struggling to breathe. After being begged by Ms. Bland MacInnes to end the patient's suffering, Dr. Nancy Morrison injected Mr. Mills with nitroglycerin which should have decreased his blood pressure and as a result, decreased his suffering (Fisher, p. 262). However, this attempt failed and Dr. Morrison proceeded to inject the patient with potassium chloride, consequently ending Mr. Mills life. In acting upon the biomedical ethics principle of beneficence, Dr. Nancy Morrison’s decision to inject Paul Mills with potassium chloride is ethically justifiable.

According to Dr. Jacob Kevorkian, “Dying is not a crime” (Wikipedia, para. 1). Dr. Kevorkian, also called Dr. Death, is infamous for terminally ill patient’s right to die through physician assisted suicide; he is known as being “one of the most famous euthanasia activist” (Wikipedia, para. 1). He “assisted” over one hundred and thirty people. However, not all of those patients were terminally ill. Sixty percent of those patients that received help from Kevorkian were not terminal; within the sixty percent, over thirteen did not complain of pain. (Wikipedia, para. 11). Dr. Kevorkian did not follow the requirements to do this type of procedure and his counseling was too short. Nineteen of Dr. Kevorkian’s patients had already died within twenty-four hours after the first visit with him, he also did not provide a psychiatric exam for at least

“Dying is not a crime” stated Jack Kevorkian. Dr. Jack Kevorkian, also known as Murad Kevorkian or Dr. Death, had strong opinions on euthanasia. Kevorkian was, simply put, obsessed with death. His eccentric passion made him the most famous activist for physician-assisted suicide. Kevorkian committed his life to aiding those who suffered from acute medical conditions. Kevorkian made statements under oath and to the press that he considered it his duty to assist persons in their death. He also indicated under oath that because he thought laws to the contrary were archaic and unjust, he would persist in civil disobedience, even under threat of criminal punishment. (Wikipedia.org). Laws were unclear on the subject of assisted suicide so, Kevorkian forced the courts to face the issue of whether assisted suicide should be a legal option in certain instances. Kevorkian is said to have over 130 “victims” who were all terminally ill patients.

Kevorkian was sentenced to prison in 1998 for the death of a man suffering from Lou Gehrig’s disease, Tom Youk. Although Dr. Kevorkian had the victims consent, he was sentenced to 20-25 years in prison for murder. Dr. Kevorkian made an appeal in 2001 stating; “Mercy killing is constitutional.” However, Kevorkian remains in jail today because the Michigan court of appeals does not agree with his statement. During his trial, Kevorkian asked the judge if he could call Youk’s wife and brother to confirm the suffering Youk

Euthanasia is classified in several different types. Voluntary euthanasia is where a person makes a conscious decision to die and asks for help to do this. Non-voluntary euthanasia – where a person is unable to give their consent (for example, because they are in a coma or are severely brain damaged) and another person takes the decision on their behalf, often

Euthanasia can be defined as a process which painlessly helps a terminally ill person to die on their request . There are different types of Euthanasia which includes; Voluntary, Involuntary, Non-voluntary, Passive and Active Euthanasia.

Today, the resolution for the debate is “Let it be resolved that euthanasia should be morally permissible for the disabled and children”. To begin with, one must comprehend the essence of “euthanasia” and “morally permissible” to follow the arguments in this debate. According to the Oxford Dictionary, euthanasia is “the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma”. Whereas, morally permissible according to Deni Elliot, in her book “Ethics the First Person” means the “behaviour that is tolerated by the moral system”. With regards to Euthanasia, it is classified as active and passive. In layman’s terms, “Active Euthanasia” is when the immediate result of death is not from the patient’s disease but a medical action was done to result their death such as providing a lethal drug. In the other hand, “Passive Euthanasia” is when the death is caused by the patient’s disease which enables to advance naturally without any influence of treatment which might prolong the patients’ life. As I have stated my clarifications, I am hereby to present three arguments within the PRO side of the debate.

Euthanasia is the act of a physician or other third party ending a patient's life in response to severe pain and suffering. Euthanasia can be classified into three types. They are voluntary euthanasia, non-voluntary euthanasia and involuntary euthanasia. Involuntary euthanasia is the action that takes the patient’s life without any informed consent of the patient but the patient may want to live.

I will be arguing whether the primary health care team should be able suggest euthanasia as an option for their patients. The primary healthcare team refers to the doctors that will be the publics first call when they need medical help, for example General Practitioners, nurses, support staff, midwives, practise managers and health visitors are all part of the primary healthcare team. They will know the most about their patients’ health and wellbeing.

First of all, what is euthanasia? It is something that not many people think about until they or a friend or family member is put in a position where they might actually have to consider it. Euthanasia, in the dictionary, simply is: the action of ending someone’s life in a painless way. It seems pretty simple but in reality it is a lot more complicated, not only for the people involved but for the society in general as well.