Active Euthanasia and Why It Should Be Legalized
Every year, millions of people are diagnosed with terminal illnesses. Every day, millions suffer indescribable pain. The pain can get so bad that patients are put into medically induced comas. Others sign a DNR, or Do-Not-Resuscitate order, which forces medical professionals to not take any life saving actions when the time comes. Reaching that point is bad enough, but having to continue living after deciding to welcome death is a fate too terrible to imagine. There is a solution, though. Often described as a “mercy killing,” this is achieved when a physician uses medication to put the patient out of their misery-either in a hospital setting administered by the doctor through an IV, or prescribed and filled at a pharmacy to be taken by the patient in their own home. This medication is already being used on humans. Death row inmates are killed by lethal injection all over the country. Why is it that a serial killer gets to die peacefully, while infants and elderly with horrible diseases must suffer for weeks, months, or even years before finally being welcomed into the afterlife? Active euthanasia offers a way to end pain and suffering peacefully and safely when nothing else can.
Euthanasia can either be passive or active. Passive euthanasia is death caused by allowing nature to take its course like unplugging a machine needed to keep that patient alive or not performing a surgery that could extend the patient’s lifespan.
The different types of Euthanasia are active or passive euthanasia and voluntary or involuntary euthanasia. Passive Euthanasia generally refers to the ending of a persons life by removing the person from a life-sustaining machine, such as a respirator. This form of euthanasia is endorsed by the American Medical Association and is less controversial than
According to James Rachel’s paper on "Active and Passive Euthanasia", once the initial decision not to prolong the patient's agony has been made, active is preferred rather than passive. His example focuses on the case of “a patient who is dying of incurable cancer of the throat is in terrible pain, which can no
In cases where an individual's quality of life is irreparably diminished by terminal illness, one may seek to end their life with the help of a doctor. This has been a solution for patient suffering in neighboring countries, but there are ethical and legal issues that make it an impractical solution for American healthcare. Considering the results of negative potential of euthanasia practices exposes its flaws, and sheds light on better alternatives. Therefore active euthanasia, not to be confused with physician assisted suicide, should not be legalized in the United States.
One of the most controversial matters in today’s society is whether or not a terminally ill patient who is in insufferable pain should have the right to choose life or death. As harsh as that sounds, death is imminent for us all. When a dying person's quality of life is so poor, they should have the legal right to choose to die peacefully and with dignity. According to Gerrit Kimsma, an Associate Professor in Medical Philosophy, “Assisting death in so way precludes giving the best palliative care possible but rather integrates compassionate care and respect for the patient’s autonomy and ultimately makes death with dignity a real option” (Kimsma n.pag.). Prolonging the inevitable causes unnecessary false hope and extensive emotional suffering for both the patient and their loved ones. Euthanasia offers a patient the right to openly and honestly choose their fate. This removes the families constant wonder of whether or not they made the “right” medical decision on behalf of their loved one. A frequent misconception with Euthanasia is that it is simply just suicide but according to Penney Lewis with BBC News, “Euthanasia is an intervention undertaken with the intention of ending a life to relieve suffering, for example a lethal injection administered by a doctor and assisted suicide is any act that intentionally helps another person kill themselves” (Lewis n.pag.). In no way are Euthanasia and assisted suicide performed for the same reasons. They may both
Most adults diagnosed with cancer undergo years of treatment in attempts to cure that cancer. However, sometimes these treatments may not work, or the cancer is found too late in a patient to be stopped, and a patient’s cancer can be determined terminal, which means that the cancer can not be cured and will lead to death. If cancer is determined terminal, end-of-life care can be administered patients to control lasting pains, including shortness of breath, nausea, and constipation. However, this treatment does not cure the cancer, and will not prevent death in a terminally ill cancer patient. In some cases, patients decide that receiving end-of-life treatment is not worth it if the treatment does not prevent death. Terminally ill cancer patients may also continue to experience unbearable suffering, despite end-of-life treatments, as it is not always effective. These factors may push some terminally ill cancer patients to request to be actively euthanized. Active euthanasia is the merciful ending of a patient’s life through a single act, such as an injection. Terminally ill cancer patients should have the right to determine if they are actively euthanized. However, only patients who consider their suffering unbearable should have the right to be euthanized.
Voluntary euthanasia, or physician-assisted suicide, has been a controversial issue for many years. It usually involves ending a patient’s life early to relieve their illness. Most of the controversy stemmed from personal values like ethics or religion. The euthanasia debate puts a huge emphasis on what doctors should do for their patients and how much a person’s life is worth. Supporters of euthanasia primarily focus on cost and pain alleviation. Opponents of euthanasia tend to focus on morality. Whether euthanasia is legal or not could significantly affect future generations’ attitudes about death. Euthanasia should be legalized nationally because it helps patients that could be in unimaginable pain, offers more options for more people, and it is relatively inexpensive compared to the alternatives.
Derived from the Greek word ‘eu’, meaning ‘good’, and ‘thanatos’, meaning ‘death’, Euthanasia is known as the intentional killing or allowance of death of a hopelessly sick or injured individual in a merciless, painless fashion. The American Heritage Dictionary defines euthanasia as “the act or practice of ending the life of a person or animal having a terminal illness or a medical condition that causes suffering perceived as incompatible with an acceptable quality of life, as by lethal injection or the suspension of certain medical treatments.” To put it blatantly, it is a form of suicide. Often referred to in other terms such as “mercy killing” or “Physician-assisted suicide” or simply “assisted suicide”, euthanasia has two procedural classifications: passive and active. Passive euthanasia is when the life sustaining treatments being provided to the patient are withheld. In these cases, patients die because medical professionals either don’t perform any necessary actions to keep the patient alive or they stop doing performing any current actions that were keeping the patient alive. This would include scenarios such as removing the patient off of life support, disconnecting a feeding tube or discontinuing previously provided life-sustaining drugs. Active euthanasia occurs when a medical professional or someone of other authority intentionally performs an action that results in the patient’s death. Euthanasia is the conscious act of a physician or any other individual
Pertaining to Ms. Benchetrit first point, Euthanasia is clearly superior to palliative care or Hospice care: As my colleague already stated, Using Ontario physician fees, they calculated that euthanasia could cost between $269 to $756(check these numbers). This also depends on the doctors or drugs involved in the process. However, Palliative care or hospices cost around $1100 per day in an acute care hospital bed, $630-$770 per day in a bed at a palliative care unit and $460 per day in a residential hospice bed. By using euthanasia, it saves the patient an enormous amount of money. Also, sadly, palliative care is not a cure and just prolongs someone's life for no reason. In addition, Palliative care can be difficult for families because they have to watch their loved one in a terrible state when they are slowly dying. Palliative care is still an acceptable option for some people, although euthanasia is a preferable alternative that should be authorized in Canada.
Euthanasia is an act or practice of causing or permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured individuals in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy, it is also called mercy killing. Also, it defines euthanasia as assisted suicide, physician-assisted suicide. This means to take a deliberate action with the intention of ending a life to relieve intractable suffering.
When imagining assisted suicide, people often envision blood, knives, overdosing, or depression. Nonetheless, suicide is not always expressed through goriness. In fact, it raises awareness towards one of the biggest debates of our generation, the legalism of euthanasia. Euthanasia, the Greek word for “good death,” is the permitting of suicide when experiencing physical suffering. As the definition indicates, this course of death is peaceful and by choice. If desired, affected patients should be able to use euthanasia, for it can relieve pain, prevent overcrowding in hospitals, and support religion and beliefs.
There have been many topics of controversy throughout the years, but none have been treated with the same degree of taboo as that of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. Issues of the right to die, as well as a dignified death, have surfaced as topics of great debate, with many questioning when and if individuals have the right to end their own lives. There are many demographics that influence a person’s attitude towards voluntary active euthanasia (VAE) and physician-assisted suicide (PAS), of which ‘fear, loss of control, loss of dignity… appear to be among more onerous factors that have stirred the current euthanasia movement’ . This report identifies how these demographics, as well as age, gender, religion and level of education, influence a person’s attitude towards VAE and PAS using a variety of sources, including university theses/dissertations, (youtube video) and internet research. Additionally, a survey was completed by Australian citizens, ranging from sixteen to over seventy years of age.
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
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?