A Persuasive Speech : The Benefits Of Euthanasia

As we have explained so far throughout our speeches, we think that for the people that are suffering because their treatment is not working, that they should have the option of euthanasia.Under such circumstances, because they are suffering and nothing is working they should have a choice - that means it is of their own will - to die a painless death with the assistance of a doctor. We believe there are too many stories of people who are suffering and want the pain to end but can't die with dignity. Some of them end up committing suicide on their own.

To begin with, legalisation of euthanasia gives an option in people’s lives. According to a survey which was taken by Australians, 40 percent of Australian agree with euthanasia as it will lift their quality of life and dignity (Australian Doctor, 2011). In Chilli, 2015, there was a teenage Chilean girl who was suffering from cystic fibrosis. She uploaded a YouTube Clip saying, “I urgently request to speak to the president because I'm tired of living with this illness... I want her approval so I can get a shot that will make me sleep forever.” (Jay Akbar , 2015) Her dad also said, “...Now my daughter just wants to die in a dignified way,” (Jay Akbar , 2015).However, her request was rejected, so she had to die painfully after two months. If euthanasia was allowed to her, she could have ended her life as she asked for, ‘die in a dignified

In 1994, physician-assisted suicide became legal in Oregon which was the only state during that time. Physician-assisted suicide, also euthanasia, is when a physician provides a patient with the medical means or the medical knowledge to commit suicide. Particular words are so sensitive that individuals across the world are still, to this day, attempting to delete the Death with Dignity Act. The notion legalizing assisted suicide frightens citizens; however, they do not know how the patient feels. Laws like this should be used to open the minds of citizens who believe that physician-assisted dying is morally wrong and help patients in pain. Patients with a terminal illness should be allowed assisted suicide because their organs can be used freely to save another's life, they can pass knowing it was their choice, and it can decrease the hospital costs of the patients.

Euthanasia, otherwise known as assisted suicide, has always been a highly controversial topic among society. As a result, the Australian government has been hesitant to permit the practice ever since it’s foundation, with an almost blank slate in terms of legalization in our history. The word itself originates from the Greek word, meaning ‘good death’ - an excellent summary of euthanasia and the benefits it presents.

Many patients would rather die in a healthy, strong, and stable environment so they are remembered that way. Patients see it as being able to die with dignity, however, family and friends may not be able to understand it because they are not in that victim’s position which makes it harder for them to accept the patient’s decision. It is never easy to lose a loved one, but would you rather be able to watch your loved one pass in a calm and relaxing state or suffer from illness and pain. With that being said, patients with long term illnesses should have the option to undergo euthanasia to allow them to enjoy their last moments on earth with the ones they love; their last moments should be memorable for both the patient and their family. Many people are against the euthanasia process because it is against some religions, and seen as devaluing one's life. However, in the article “Euthanasia: Your Body, Your Death, Your Choice” says, “The practice would not devalue life or result in pressure being put on an individual  to end their life but would allow those with no hope to die with dignity and without unnecessary suffering” (Irish Council for Bioethics). Although people view euthanasia as devaluing life, it is actually very helpful for the victim to have enough time to prepare for the imminent death, and it gives them

A Dutch report into euthanasia found that in 86% of cases, euthanasia shortened life by a maximum of a week and a few hours. For those patients it was a last resort to escape the unbearable agony who would rather the agony ended on their terms rather than in a few days’ time.

Envision one of your family members being diagnosed with end-stage cancer that has spread throughout their entire body. They are helplessly suffering from pain that cannot be controlled with any type of treatment or pain medications. Meanwhile your cousin has been watching her father slowly die and lose all quality of life. While some doctors believe that assisted suicide is morally wrong, it is the right way to end the pain and suffering of terminal illnesses in certain situations. If that family member could have been given the option of assisted suicide, they wouldn’t have to go through so much unnecessary suffering and they could die with dignity.

Today I am here to talk about the controversial issue of euthanasia. This year, the Greens party has planned to introduce a ‘Rights of the Terminally Ill’ bill into state parliament. This has raised the issue of whether or not euthanasia should be legalised in Australia. Euthanasia is the practice of ending a person’s life in order to release them from an incurable disease or intolerable suffering. There are two types of euthanasia: voluntary and involuntary. Voluntary euthanasia occurs upon request and involuntary euthanasia refers to ending the life of a person who is not mentally competent, such as a comatose patient, or hastening the death of someone who

Imagine this, you are lying in your death bed, enduring unimaginable excruciating pain, and you are only surviving with needles pumping substances in and out of you, day and night, while your life is slowly being snuffed out. Would you die slowly, experiencing inhuman suffer knowing that you can never escape the inevitable, living in fear of tomorrow, or would you choose to die a quick, painless and dignified death. And this choice introduces me to my speech topic – why should euthanasia be legalized?

Why is it that when we see a disabled person, we tend to feel pity and sometimes consider than inferior than rest of the people whom we in society connote as normal. Disability is often defined in a Foucauldian perception of being a social construct rather than the actual disability which is the lack of ability which can relate to physical and mental imparity to the norms. Utilising interpretivism epistemology and an empiricism perspective, this essay shall explore disability social perception, the facilities provided, euthanasia and government regulations in a contrast between Australia and the United Kingdom.

Euthanasia is the painless killing of a patient suffering from a terminal illness. When most people bring upon this subject it opens a very broad debate. It could easily be seen in both a negative way and positive way. Some people see it as more of murder and morally incorrect, but some view it as a way to keep someone from suffering until their death. There are ways to cure colds, fevers, broken bones, etc. but for those who are terminally ill, have to live in pain and agony knowing it won’t get better. Despite plentiful hard evidence to the contrary, the same way we have the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, we should have to right to death. Also, government shouldn’t be able to define our end-of-life decisions, or our bodily choices. Lastly, keeping the patient alive costs more money and emotional distress than to keep them suffering with no hope of getting better.

Whilst the reasoning behind euthanasia and assisted suicide often seems clear, the debate over its support has been driven by the vast definitions and conflicting moral views provided by those who support or are against the omission. The following essay will outline the differing delineations of euthanasia and the societal impacts it has upon certain groups. Following an in-depth discussion into the legal and regulated landscape this essay will propose recommendations as to whether euthanasia needs to be regulated and controlled in Australia.

Everyone has experienced an extreme pain at some point in their life. This pain could be physical or emotional; but could you imagine being told you have to live with that pain until you die that could be days, months, or years from now? What if you were then told that you were going to die soon from that pain? Would you choose physician assisted suicide (PAS) if you didn’t want to suffer anymore? Euthanasia is defined as the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable disease or an irreversible coma. However, if it is what you want who should stand in your way; some of the states in the United States are legalizing this option. In order to make sure this option is the right one, there is a criterion the patient must meet as well as a few other protocols. If euthanasia is legal in some states, why shouldn’t it be legal in all and should it be legal in general? I believe it should be legal in all states.

If you could decipher your death, how would you choose to die? How would that answer change if you were suffering? Euthanasia, also known as “good death,” is the act of putting a living thing to death painlessly or allowing them to die by withholding extreme medical practices, such as withholding food. Then there is involuntary euthanasia: “a competent person’s life is brought to an end despite an explicit rejection of euthanasia” as stated by Robert Young, the author of Medically Assisted Death. In the case of euthanasia, many people will argue that it is murder, but considering all the ways to die, it is one of the most humane ways to end a life.

The cost of healthcare has risen dramatically and shows every sign of continuing to do so (Australian Psychological Society n.d.). The Australian Psychological Society claim that for many, the improper use of life support systems to temporary lengthen life, without any improvement in the quality of life, can be used as a good argument for euthanasia (Australian Psychological Society n.d.). Medical policy and hospital practice means decisions are already being made about who qualifies for life support. This implies an already covert practice of euthanasia (Chaney 2001). Therefore, some form of legalisation would acknowledge an already existing practice and extend the decision making to the patient also.