Argumentative Arguments Against Euthanasia

Euthanasia (assisted-suicide) has created controversial issues within the practice of medicine and humanity especially here in the United States. The practice of euthanasia

Source http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1174693/ : This article is relevant to the central ethical issues because it explains the back story with Dr. Kevorkian and specifically Thomas Youk’s case; also, it provides opinions of those who advocate for the rights of patients with disabilities. Diane Coleman, president of Not Yet Dead, states that this euthanasia movement that Dr. Kevorkian is overall promoting is seemingly “very threatening to disabled people”; Dr. Nancy W. Dickey, president of the American Medical Association, even adds that “patients can be relieved that the guilty verdict helps protect them from those who would have taken their life early”. Overall, I have learned that the pro-life advocates version of “proper end

I will let my aunt chose to live or die! Euthanasia also medically termed as “physician-assisted suicide”, is medically defined; by the Merriam-Webster Dictionary as suicide by a patient facilitated by means or information (as a drug prescription or indication of the lethal dosage) provided by a physician who is aware of how the patient intends to use such means or information. Individuals all over the world are living through this situation without being supported.With this being said the acceptance of this will allow my aunt to not live through suffering from ovarian cancer. Although many deem euthanasia wrong, it is medically ethical for physicians to assist terminal patient's choice to end their lives because it exercises a patient's autonomy on living without suffering critically. Therefore, physicians shall ethically support the allowing of euthanasia.

Euthanasia is the act of deliberately ending a person’s life to relieve suffering. For instance, if a doctor administer overdose of muscle relaxants to a patient suffering from terminal cancer to end his/her life would considered to have carried out euthanasia.

Misdiagnosis is one of the largest factors as to why voluntary euthanasia should not be legalized. How much do you actually trust medical accuracy? Being misdiagnosed is one of the greatest fears one can have when battling a terminal illness, and is more common than one may think. Researchers at John Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore reviewed tissue samples from 6,000 cancer patients nationwide. It showed that one out of 71 cases turned out misdiagnosed where the biopsy labeled cancer when it wasn’t. (CNN). Erica Riel testified against physician-assisted suicide at the public hearing on January 29, 2013, before two Senate committees. Erica had been diagnosed with a terminal illness three times by Vermont doctors, only to learn later that that

Euthanasia is the painless killing of a patient suffering from some kind of incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma. The purpose of euthanasia is to end the life of patients who cannot escape their condition and return to a normal life. Often, patients want to be euthanized when they are suffering from a terminal illness. The family of a patient might want the patient to be euthanized when the patient is in a coma that is irreversible. A patient can also put in writing that they would like to be euthanized if they are in an

In the Ancient World, specifically Greece, Rome, and Egypt, society believed that if a person had no interest in continuing their life, then society had no bond to force them to continue it. Even in the 1930s there were organizations that aided in awareness and legalization of voluntary and assisted suicide (the Hemlock Society, the Voluntary Euthanasia Society). The issue became media frenzy in the late 1990s with the efforts of Dr. Jack Kevorkian and others and continues to be contentious (Fridstein, 10).

When dealing with a heated topic that is controversial such as euthanasia people often use their emotions to decide the decision. I know this because I often do this myself. And at least for me I don’t even want to listen to the other persons view. But as Rachels points out in order to really know the truth one must listen to the opposing arguments. One must discipline him or herself to listen to both sides and know that facts must come before emotion. And this is often very difficult. Especially with euthanasia were people will have a mix of emotions and reasons. Some may have had personal experience dealing with people close to death. Others may not have. Thus we must know the benefits and negatives of euthanasia. We must be open to both

Euthanasia is the assisted ending of a person life in response to pain and suffering. There are two types of Euthanasia: Voluntary and involuntary. ("Top 10 Pros and Cons – Euthanasia,2010) Voluntary euthanasia refers to a patient and physician

Euthanasia is the act of killing a patient who is undergoing a very serious painful disease that can’t be cured. The killing process involved does not involve any pain. There are different classification of euthanasia; involuntary and voluntary, non-voluntary, passive and active euthanasia. Active euthanasia refers to the painless killing of a patient using poison. It is done by administering any poisonous injection to the hopeless patient (Wennberg 175).

Euthanasia is the intentional killing of a dependent human being by act or omission for his or her alleged benefit. If death is not intended, it is not an act of euthanasia. As you would imagine, there are many different aspects and ways to go about the intentional killing of a human being. Voluntary euthanasia is described as when the person who is killed has requested to be killed. Non-voluntary euthanasia is when the person who is killed made no request and gave no consent. An example of non-voluntary euthanasia

All of us sadly will have to face death one day which can be a painful and suffering

The constitution is the most influential document that has affected our everyday life. With the constitution comes protected natural rights that is the framework that guides and limits the power obtained by our government. In the constitution, there have been 27 amendments. In amendment 9, it issues the right of people, but how much if it do we actually have?

The term “euthanasia," in the context of animals, reminds most of a traumatizing trip to the vet, to end the suffering of their beloved pet in the most “humane” way. But, euthanasia, within the connection of a human becomes a sin, taboo, and a one-way plummet to any quality physician's career, ill-intentions or not. The problem with all of this includes issues that most avoid, but politicians thrive on. The argument of the religions involved and human rights always seem to form a slippery slope that most promptly falls into a fight over ethicality. The people of the United States pride themselves on their freedom, and their rights to live. If they have the right to life, does that not also include the right to choose what they want to do with that life, and how they want to end it? If people are allowed to choose who they marry and whichever career they desire to follow, how can they not be obliged to additionally choose a peaceful death? A possible solution to this issue includes the legalization of PAS, to completely allow any patient- suffering from a terminal disease- to choose if they want to euthanize themselves as a pleasant alternative, versus the suffering of a slow, painful death. How can it be so obtuse to think that euthanizing a human- ending a person’s suffering mercifully- when it should be the patient's last respected request? Not only would legalizing physician-assisted suicide provide patients with a positive alternative to pain, but it

Euthanasia is a very controversial and sensitive topic because of the ethical, legal, and moral issues of it. In the United States alone, it is illegal almost everywhere, however; it’s legal in Colorado, Vermont, Montana, Washington D.C., Oregon, Washington, and California. But, what exactly is euthanasia? Euthanasia can be categorized in three different ways; voluntary euthanasia, non-voluntary euthanasia, and involuntary euthanasia. Voluntary euthanasia is when a patient agrees to receive assistance to end his or her own life, which is legal in some places around the globe. Non-voluntary euthanasia occurs when the consent of the patient is not available. For example, if an individual is in a coma or vegetative state, they are physically incapable of giving consent. Involuntary euthanasia happens when an individual decides to end a patient's life without asking for consent, or doing it against the patient’s will. This can also be considered murder. Initiating euthanasia can be in the forms of, but not limited to, injections, drugs, Nitschke’s suicide pill, and dehydration, all of which vary in pain. In addition, it is estimated that we spend approximately 20-30% of insurance money to the terminally ill. Despite being seen as ethically wrong, the legalization of voluntary euthanasia can be beneficial and great around the world, because it prevents gory and horrific deaths, can be the key for terminally ill people to avoid agonizing and intense pain, and it can