Arguments on Euthanasia In this paper, I will be presenting the opposing arguments on Euthanasia, the controversial issue of terminally ill patients committing suicide with the assistance of a physician. One of the main arguments for euthanasia is that people have the right to die. Many people for euthanasia have the mindset that humans have the right to control his or her body and life and therefore have the freedom to choose how, where and when they will die. This belief stems from the idea of free will, which is a fundamental part of the human soul. Adding to this argument, supporters state that other human rights include the right to die such as the right to life, which is not the right to simply exist or to a life of minimum quality …show more content…
As for violating the patient’s autonomy, supporters contend that to violate a person’s autonomy would be to violate that person’s wishes but this is not the case of a person who does wish to die. The belief that death hurts people stems from the idea that it prevents people from living the life they could have. To supporters, people who request to be euthanized have a low quality of life and acknowledge that their life will only get worse. A person who wants to die did not make that choice because they had nothing to live for but because at some point they decided the pain was too much to endure. The main argument against euthanasia is that it goes against the will of God. Opponents of euthanasia claim the it is God who gets to decide who lives and who dies and to commit suicide would be to go against the will of God. Opponents also argue that it was the philosopher Immanuel Kant who said that rational human beings should be treated as an end in themselves and not as a means to something else; Our worth is not dependent on anything. If we exist we have value despite whatever condition that existence is in. Those against euthanasia also feel that euthanasia is against the patient’s best interest because the diagnosis may inaccurate and the patient is not terminally ill or the patient may be unable to make a sound judgement regarding their
Furthermore, euthanasia is a disgrace to humanity. An individual person or group shouldn’t decide how, when, and if another person should die. The act of ending someone’s life just because another decided that the individual’s life gives no worth to the person or to society is unjust. That is simply the person’s opinion, and their opinion shouldn’t end a precious human life. Usually, people with disabilities who request euthanasia, do so because of how others treat them, not because of their actual disability. If we were to respect those with disabilities, that would remove hardships, not death. Another reason why euthanasia is wrong is that a person who can’t think straight or is a human vegetable, a person who does not have mental or physical abilities (O’Steen). She/he can be killed by a guardian’s request according to law, even if the patient never showed a desire to die. The Declaration of Independence states our rights to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” and euthanasia goes against that. If the right to live is reduced, all over rights are worthless (“Euthanasia Statement”).
More than likely, a good majority of people have heard about euthanasia at least once in their existence. For those out there who have been living under a rock their entire lives, euthanasia “is generally understood to mean the bringing about of a good death – ‘mercy killing’, where one person, ‘A’, ends the life of another person, ‘B’, for the sake of ‘B’.” (Kuhse 294). There are people who believe this is a completely logical scenario that should be allowed, and there are others that oppose this view. For the purpose of this essay, I will be defending those who are for euthanasia. My thesis, just by looking at this issue from a logical standpoint, is that if someone is suffering, I believe they should be allowed the right to end their
Today, medical interventions have made it possible to save or prolong lives, but should the process of dying be left to nature? (Brogden, 2001). Phrases such as, “killing is always considered murder,” and “while life is present, so is hope” are not enough to contract with the present medical knowledge in the Canadian health care system, which is proficient of giving injured patients a chance to live, which in the past would not have been possible (Brogden, 2001). According to Brogden, a number of economic and ethical questions arise concerning the increasing elderly population. This is the reason why the Canadian society ought to endeavor to come to a decision on what is right and ethical when it comes to facing death.
One of the largest arguments made about physician assisted suicide is it is morally wrong. Supporters of the right-to-die movement, argue that just as courts have found that there is a constitutional right to refuse medical treatment, there is a similar right to ask for medical assistance in dying. When patients reach a point where illness, pain, suffering, and lack of freedom have essentially destroyed their quality of life, supporters contend, they should have the ability to end their lives legally and in a dignified manner. The government, supporters argue, has no right to interfere in this choice (" The Right to Die" ). Assisted suicide proponents argue that it is like abortion, it is a choice issue because doctors have enough knowledge to know when a patient is close to dying. Accredited
Obviously, the proponents and opponents of legalizing euthanasia/assisted-suicide are fighting for what they believe is right. On the side of the proponents, they believe that patient’s should have the freedom to end their own life if they choose. They believe in the right-to-die and that everyone should have the ability to choose what they do with their own body. Contrasting this viewpoint, the
A patient could feel that it is unfair to be denied what they believe their right to die is. There are additional issues that a patient could experience along with the loss of their health. There is the loss of privacy, pride, and dignity when unable to care for self.
“I’m not afraid of being dead. I’m just afraid of what you might have to go through to get there.” This quotation stated by Pamela Bone a former Age journalists and columnist is discussing her opinion about euthanasia. Euthanasia is also known as physician-assisted suicide and it is clearly is exactly what it is explained. A physician or a doctor gives lethal dose of medication until the patient passes away. Just as the quotation described it people have their beliefs on what is the right way to die and this is why this topic can be considered very controversial because it is an assisted suicide. The people who are against euthanasia believe that it is inhumane and it shown that the process of euthanasia may not be as easy process as people assume it be. However, on the other stance, people believe that if a patient is terminally ill and that patient will head down that road then it would less painful emotionally and physically if the patient had the choice to end it.
The first argument for legalising euthanasia indicates to autonomy and fundamental right. Life is extremely precious and must be protected but not at any circumstances, like, a patient who is suffering from physical pain cause of terminal ill and wishing to eradicate from the endless pain. It is a fundamental right to everyone to make decision about those things are momentous to us, like, how we die (Short, 2016). Therefore, many supporters of euthanasia perceive that everyone has the right to control their body and life, and should be free to decide at what time, and in which manner they will die (Brooks,
The right to live one’s life on his or her own terms is a basic tenet in the modern world. In American society, the people are given free reign (within legal and social boundaries, of course) to choose how to live. They can choose where to go to school, what to learn, what they want to work, when they want to retire, and so on and so forth. However, when people reach the end of their lives, this right to autonomy seems to be restricted, especially in those who are terminally ill. This autonomy sees itself at the center of the debate around the practice of euthanasia, a medical procedure in which a patient with a terminal or incurable illness is permitted to die in a painless manner (“Euthanasia”). While one might think that allowing one who
The legalization of euthanasia has always been a highly debatable topic since it causes philosophical, religious, moral and ethical controversy where some people believe it reduces our respect for the value of human life and it will be a gateway for other immoral actions to be normalized even though it is a basic human right that patients all over the world are denied to this day.
“Autonomy is the right of a person to control his or her own body and life decisions” (Manning 26). This is absolutely correct. Governments, groups, and various people can argue against autonomy forever. The simple fact is we have control over ourselves, whether people like it or not. It gives us an added responsibility to thoroughly think about what it is we do with our bodies. These are decisions for the individual. Many of us go through life trying to control everything that happens around us and, at times, situations that do not involve us. The one thing we can control is ourselves. Everyone passes judgment and often overlooks what is within. Nobody takes euthanasia more seriously than those considering it. The choice is not a split decision. This is something people deeply meditate upon before going through
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.
Euthanasia is the practice of ending an individual's life in order to relieve them from an incurable disease or unbearable suffering. The term euthanasia is derived from the Greek word for "good death" and originally referred to as “intentional killing” ( Patelarou, Vardavas, Fioraki, Alegakis, Dafermou, & Ntzilepi, 2009). Euthanasia is a controversial topic which has raised a great deal of debate globally. Although euthanasia has received great exposure in the professional media, there are some sticky points that lack clarity and need to be addressed. Euthanasia is a divisive topic, and different interpretations of its meaning, depend on whether the person supports it or not. While a few societies have accepted euthanasia, there are
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