Before I go into depth about James Rachels’ position on euthanasia I will discuss what is euthanasia. According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, euthanasia is defined as “the act or practice of killing or permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured individuals (such as persons or domestic animals) in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy” and of which in most cases can only be done by a doctor. Euthanasia has been practiced and debated for its ethics since as early as the 15th century among ancient Greeks and Romans who had tended to support its practices but not always administered in the most ethical standards.
However, here is the United States euthanasia is considered illegal in most of the United States, besides California, Oregon, Colorado, Washington, Washington DC, and Vermont. Endeavors to legitimize euthanasia brought about ballots and enactment charges inside the United States over the past 20 years. For many reason that bring about ethical controversies euthanasia is cognizant to the study of ethics because studying euthanasia can help people really asses a factor to the morality of mankind. Answering questions such as “is euthanasia permissible?” and “under what circumstances should euthanasia be allowed?” Answers to questions like these bring us to the position of debate when we try to deeply asses’ euthanasia. Additionally, being able to answer these questions helps with the aiding in further research that can go towards the study of ethics
Voluntary euthanasia is when a person make a conscious decision to end their and ask for help to use this. Euthanasia itself means an intentional termination of their life by others because the person is incurable or is in an irreversible coma. This topic became one of the most controversial topics in the world. Some argue whether voluntary euthanasia morally acceptable. However, others believe that we are playing with God since God create human alive and by taking our own life if like disrespect God.
In the article titled, “The Wrongfulness of Euthanasia”, J. Gay-Williams concludes that euthanasia should be illegal. J. Gay-Williams definition of euthanasia is taking a hopeless person’s life. He also explains what is considered euthanasia and what is not considered euthanasia. Someone
Euthanasia can be a life reliever to the patients in pain and suffering from an illness that is incurable, or can go completely against the morals and values of cultural groups. It is quite controversial, and is debated among society whether it is right to take the life of a patient who requests it or not. The facts must be considered about this issue before any laws and/or guidelines are set into place.
(Young, 1996) Euthanasia has been the subject of both moral, religious, philosophical, legal and human right’s arguments for a number of years. In the modern day usage, euthanasia has come to imply that someone’s life is ended for compassionate reasons by passive or active steps taken by another person.
In James Rachel’s article Active and Passive Euthanasia, James provides the argument that there is no difference between active and passive euthanasia because in the end, either through inaction or action, it both results in death and there are no moral differences in ‘killing’ or ‘letting die’. Rachel provides several different arguments to support his case including a patient dying of terminal cancer, and two uncles and the death of their nephews.
The field of ethics exists specifically to help people make moral decisions with a sense of consistency and equality. Morality and moral decisions are never quite as clear and easily reduced as they appear to be in text form. The concepts of rights, duties, preferences, cultural sensitivities, the priorities of individuals and societies at large, all of these come into play when making moral decisions. This is all the more the case in areas wherein a loss of life is concerned. Death is a large part of life and has extreme significance in all cultures, which is made all the more complicated when it is caused by one's own hand.
The interpretation of euthanasia, whether it is voluntary or involuntary, varies with each individual. The concept of euthanasia continues to be a debated and argued and it remains to be a complex ethical situation for all involved. This paper summarizes one individual’s philosophy and values with regard to this ethical issue.
There are several arguments that favor active euthanasia. One argument is that it’s appropriate for healthcare professionals create a peaceful environment for death of an individual. A second argument is that people have the right to make their own decisions. Lastly, the remaining arguments consist of laws requiring certain safeguards to regulate the use of active euthanasia. There are several arguments that oppose this practice. The first argument in opposition is that doctor’s primary responsibility is to sustain life and to not cause death. The second argument in opposition is that patients that ill to consider this treatment are not’t mental stable enough to fully give consent. Lastly, the remaining arguments in opposition consist of how deeply this practice will affect the culture of medicine.
Euthanasia is a topic that provokes as much controversy as capital punishment, primarily because it is irreversible. The question of euthanasia being right or wrong is one that most would prefer left alone. However, recent publicity on changes to existing laws has ignited considerable discussion and has forced open the door to a much wider audience. The issues related to direct euthanasia have raised many questions in my mind, to which I am still searching for answers. I believe it is necessary to consider arguments, both, for and against, in order to come to any conclusion. In this paper I will address Brian Clowes' article in the "Pro-Life Activist's Encyclopedia", located on the
Euthanasia is defined as, "The act or practice of putting to death painlessly a person suffering from an incurable disease." Euthanasia can be traced back as far back as the ancient Greek and Roman civilizations. It was sometimes allowed in these civilizations to help others die. Voluntary euthanasia was approved in these ancient societies. Today, the practice of euthanasia causes great controversy. Both pro-life groups and right-to-die groups present arguments for their different sides. Pro-life groups make arguments and present fears against euthanasia. I contend that the case for the right to die is the stronger argument.
Currently the U.S. Supreme Court has decided that physician-assisted suicide really is based on where you live and the states’ right. Only four U.S. states have a law legally allowing physician assisted suicide. Many have questioned whether Physician - Assisted suicide is an okay course of action. According to the 1980 declaration from the Vatican, Jura et Bona, "euthanasia", or "mercy killing" is defined as "an action or an omission which of itself or by intention causes death, in order that all suffering may in this way be eliminated." Physician assisted suicide is a disputed, complicated matter that often splits the public. Physician - Assisted and Euthanasia has been a legalized course of action for quite some time, but it has flawed logic, as well as it is immoral.
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.
America’s founding fathers declared that every person had certain inalienable rights they are born with and cannot be separated from. They listed citizens’ rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Today's government must decide if a right to life equates to a right to death.
Some believe that euthanasia should be ethically viewed similarly to suicide because of the idea of choosing to end one’s own life, which is considered unethical. However, some oppose this belief, and believe
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.