Arguments Against Euthanasia

Euthanasia and assisted dying are one of the controversial topics that are highly argumentative for its legalization in many countries. Through it is legal in some countries of Europe, few states in the US, Canada, Japan, Australia is one of the countries that still against legalizing Euthanasia or assisted Dying.Though once this option was legal in NT, reformation of law has caused it to be illegal again.Discussion of this topic is prevalent in media which often fueled by the nonfrequent prosecution of individual who becomes involved in the death of patients wanting death by lethal drugs causing death(QUT,2017).Arguments against legalizing euthanasia in Australia has been discussed in this essay.

Euthanasia is defined as the deliberate ending of one's life by means of either administering prescribed lethal drugs or withholding life-sustaining treatment. The word itself is derived from the Greek roots "eu," meaning "good,” and "thanatos," meaning "death." Consequently, the issue becomes controversial, as euthanasia advocates argue a "right to die a good death" whilst others deem the killing of another being, regardless of motives, unethical and unlawful. Is it moral to end a life to end suffering? Can one truly die a good death? Is a so-called “good death” dignified? Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide suicide suggest so, yet they are a threat to society and defeat the intended purpose of the medical profession. Euthanasia (physician-

Euthanasia has been one of the most controversial and debatable topics in recent years. Even though the debate about euthanasia seems to be very complex and problematic, it is important to analyze very deeply some problems and questions related to this issue in order to indicate adequate solutions in terms of possible legislation. First step is to identify the proper definition of euthanasia as an act of causing a person's death to end unbearable pain and suffering. In addition, there are many forms of euthanasia; categorizing those forms and highlighting the development of understanding this concept over time, is necessary to understand, that involuntary euthanasia is unacceptable as it violets the basic human rights.

Euthanasia is the practice of ending the life of an individual for the purposes of relieving pain and suffering. Over the years, there has been a big debate about its merits and demerits, and the debate is not about to end anytime soon. However, no matter what side of the debate one supports, it is important to consider a few facts. One, the prolonged stay in hospital is bound to raise medical costs. Two, some medical complications bring suffering and pain to the patient without any possibility of getting back to one 's normal activities of daily living. However, ending the life of a person intentionally may be treated as a serious crime in some jurisdictions. Given these facts, it is evident that making a decision about euthanasia is bound to be a challenging task. Although not everyone might agree, euthanasia is a necessary procedure that relieves the pain and suffering of the patient and rids the family and the government of expensive medical costs that would not necessary improve the life of the patient.

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

Euthanasia as defined by the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary is a quiet and easy death. One may wonder, is there such a thing as a quiet and easy death? This is one point that I will discuss in my paper, however the question that my paper will answer is; should active euthanasia be legalized? First, I will look at Philippa Foot's article on Euthanasia and discuss my opinions on it. Second, I will look at James Rachel's article on active and passive euthanasia and discuss why I agree with his argument. Finally, I will conclude by saying that while the legalizing of active euthanasia would benefit many people, it would hurt too many, thus I believe that it should not be legalized.

Voluntary Euthanasia has been considered a controversial topic for many decades. The idea of committing an act that involves the taking of human life is not one that many people would care to discuss openly. The main argument is that a person who has been diagnosed with an incurable illness and is in extreme pain and their ability to move has been limited, while that person still has control over their destiney should they be allowed take their own life (Bowie, R.2001). The worldwide debate weather one should be allowed to end a life is still one of the biggest ethical issues. The attempt to providing the rights of the individual is in conflict with the moral values of society. Voluntary Euthanasia has been highly rejected by many religious and pro-life institutions.

On the contrary, Conservative have an opposite position. Moreland (1991) suggests that that act of suicide violates many laws that pertain to nature, ethics, and religion. Man’s very nature is to exist; if man begins to want to deliberately take his life, then this violates the natural law of living. Suicide “violates one’s sanctity of life”, in that we have the obligation to protect life and respect oneself. Moreover, these believe connect to the religious idea that we have a duty to use our life in the way God wants. Ultimately, God is the giver of life, and therefore our body is sacred. The reason God allows hardship is because he is allowing a way for individuals to grow in their faith, press forward in despite obstacles, and teach others to do the same. By teaching others, this coincides to the idea that life has a duty to the community.

In the debate over euthanasia, the opponent concludes that euthanasia should be illegal because it is goes against nature, dignity, personal-interests and has a practical effect. On the other side of the debate, the supporter concludes that euthanasia should be legal because moral principles, what it really mean to kill, end suffering, the difference between injury and not injury. In this essay I will conclude that euthanasia should be legal.

In recent years, the controversial topic of assisted suicide has gained a spot on the debate table in multiple countries. Most people automatically shun the idea of assisted suicide purely because of the wording. Whenever someone hears “suicide,” bad assumptions are going to be made--which is acceptable. The unacceptable part of the debate is the fact that people take sides before being properly informed about the topic. Assisted suicide, also known as euthanasia, is provided when a person wants to end their suffering in what they consider a dignified option. While this decision is only legal within a few states of our country, there are many people fighting to have it revoked worldwide. One person who is strongly against the idea is Rosie DiManno, a columnist for the Toronto Star, who believes no one should be able to choose their fate. She makes this evident when she refers to the recent death of her uncle by stating that “he willed himself to die in the end. . .and this is the only form of self-extinction I can morally abide” (DiManno). Although she gives compelling reasons for her side of the argument, she over does it by incorporating too much pathos in multiple occasions.

In physician assisted suicide, the option to end a patient’s life is provided to a patient with knowledge of the patient's intention. Unlike euthanasia, in physician assisted suicide, someone makes death available, but does not directly administer the death (Broeckaert 1). Euthanasia is putting someone to death who is suffering from a pain, illness or injury. Euthanasia means that someone other than the patient commits an action with the intent to end the patient's life, for example injecting a patient with a lethal dose of medication. Patients may consent to Euthanasia which is voluntary Euthanasia, refuse Euthanasia which is involuntary Euthanasia, or be unable to consent to Euthanasia which is non voluntary Euthanasia (Walsh 1). Although

The “Right to Die” (Euthanasia) should be further looked into as an option for terminally ill patients and not considered unethical. There has been an issue concerning the topic of “Human Euthanasia” as an acceptable action in society. The research compiled in conjunction with an educated opinion will be the basis for the argument for voluntary Euthanasia in this paper. Patients suffering from an incurable illness, exhausting all medical treatments, should be given the freedom of choice to continue their path of suffering or end it at their own will. “The Right to die” is not suicide, as you are fully aware that death will be certain, as Euthanasia spares the individual of additional pain.

Making policy solutions to problems where morality is the main focus has been getting harder for governments. The public policy dilemma surrounding the right to die is controversial and forces many individuals to question the decisions that governments make. Two groups are affected by the euthanasia legislation: people who voluntarily take their own lives and people who kill an individual who has not made a conscious decision to end their lives (Smith, 2015). The main focus of this paper is to highlight the predicament policy makers go through and examine the roles of governmental institutions who make attempts to settle these policy matters making everyone in the situation content. Throughout this paper, we will go through some important cases that may guide us to better understand the reason as to why policy makers form these decisions.

An estimated 44,193 suicides occur a year in the United States (“Physician-Assisted Suicide”). This large number of suicides are from people killing themselves due to depression, suffering, and much more. Assisted suicide can help people die peacefully without having to cause pain to themselves. It is an easy and painless way to end suffering to a person of any age. Assisted suicide should be legal in the United States, and any other places in the world. Assisted suicide will help many people all over the world who are unhappy with their lives.

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.