Arguments For Euthanasia Research Paper

Today, there is a large debate over the situation and consequences of euthanasia. Euthanasia is the act of ending a human’s life by lethal injection or the stoppage of medication, or medical treatment. It has been denied by most of today’s population and is illegal in the fifty states of the United States. Usually, those who undergo this treatment have a disease or an “unbearable” pain somewhere in the body or the mind. Since there are ways, other than ending life, to stop pain caused by illness or depression, euthanasia is immoral, a disgrace to humanity, according to the Hippocratic Oath, and should be illegal throughout the United States.

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.

Albert Camus once quoted, “But in the end, one needs more courage to live than to kill them self.” Today I will be discussing the topic of Euthanasia also known as “assisted suicide.” The word originated from the Greeks, meaning “good death”. Euthanasia refers to the ending of one’s life, primarily to end suffering and pain. Euthanasia is a controversial topic and generates many political and religious debates. Although euthanasia is illegal in Canada, in some jurisdictions such as the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland and the American states of Washington, Oregon and Montana, euthanasia is a legal and common practice.

Euthanasia is defined as an 'act of killing someone painlessly to relieve his or her suffering'[1]. It's etymology is derived from the Greek 'eu thanatos' which means a good death. It is a contentious issue that provokes strong arguments for and against changing UK legislation to permit it. The UK currently prohibits active euthanasia. Active euthanasia is an act where the intention is to end or deliberately shorten someone's life.

Any human being should be able to make the decision if they want to live or if they want to die. Euthanasia is the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or an irreversible coma. Though it is illegal in most countries, it is legal in Oregon and Washington and should be legal everywhere. To be able to make the decision of dying the patient must be an adult, must have two oral and one written request, must be at least between 15 days between the first and last request, patient must have less than six months to live, and the prognosis must be consulted by two physicians. Both of the doctors must confirm that the patient is capable of making this decision and must also confirm that the patient does not have a

In conducting more research on Euthanasia or assisted suicide, I was able to find more arguments on why the topic is so debated about in the medical field. Some doctors and people today feel that no patient should be able to request EAS because of the emotional impacts it has on the families of the patients involved and the pressure it puts on the physicians administering it. In my opinion, it shouldn’t be about the families or the doctors, it should be about the patients who are the ones suffering and are at the stage in their lives when they want to suffer no more. The article I found called “Can physicians conceive of performing euthanasia in case of psychiatric disease, dementia or being tired of living?” I read that even though EAS is

Euthanasia is deliberated to painless and peaceful natural deaths in old age that occur in calm and acquainted surroundings, its process is where a licensed physician ends the lifespan of another person to end their pain or distress. There are two types of euthanasian standings, which are voluntary and involuntary. Voluntary euthanasia is when a person is killed upon that person's demand for explanations of suffering. Involuntary euthanasia is the mercy killing of a physically or legally incompetent person, such as a child or a irrational elderly patient, at the request of, or by, a caregiver or family member. On the other hand, there is also assisted suicide; which occurs when one person gives another person the instructions, means, or capability to bring about their own death. Euthanasia, however, is illegal. In the contemporary years, "aid in dying" movement has made incremental gains, but the concern remains controversial. Some people fear that allowing euthanasia sends the message, "it's better to be dead than sick or disabled".

Nobody thinks of their death and desires it to be extremely painful or horrible. Rational human beings desire a good, dignified end to an ideally long and fruitful life. Circumstance, like luck, may not always be in your favor. It may not even be a terminal disease, which is so frequently used in pro-euthanasia arguments. It can be as savage as a freak accident or as simple as falling down the stairs to put you in a world of excruciating pain. While this is never to be wished on anyone, for those that have had the misfortune of being diagnosed with a terminal or painfully debilitating disease must have a choice out of it. Do we, who so desire a good death, have the right to judge others’ state when we know nothing of it? Do we have the right

The term "Euthanasia" originates from the Greek words for “good death”. It refers to both, intentionally ending a person’s life by carrying out a fatal act (active), or withholding life-saving or life-prolonging medical treatment (passive). It can also be further categorized into voluntary, non-voluntary, and involuntary, depending on patient consent. Physician-assisted suicide and assisted suicide are large components of the contemporary debate. The euthanasia debate has existed for thousands of years, with the practice existing as far back as Ancient Greece and Rome. The rise of religion played a major role in the history of euthanasia, and had a significant impact on the way human life and death were viewed. Euthanasia is opposed by all

Euthanasia debate opposes two sides in which one side argues that letting someone suffer is not ethical and the other side defend that to help someone to die is not ethical based on the morality that no one should kill or help someone to die (fundamental right that everyone is allowed to live), they judge that euthanasia should compromise the criminal code. For my own morality, I am for the euthanasia possibility for the people in need to die for the reason of the person’s well-being.

The legalization of assisted suicide makes important people feel unimportant when in fact, any individual human life is intrinsically good, holy, created by God and of immeasurable value, and it is to be revered absolutely. Much of the darkness that covers this world is rooted in our refusal to love individual human life absolutely and for its own sake (Macmanaman 22).

The purpose of this paper is to show the many sides and issues that deal with the subject of euthanasia or doctor assisted suicide. A questionnaire has been answered by 20 people over the age of 25. The results have been compared to the results taken from a similar study on doctors in Manitoba. Review of the Manitoba Survey: The original study was prepared by Neil Searles, who is a university law student. This study looks at the use of doctor assisted suicide which has rarely been looked at in Canada before. Legally and professionally euthanasia is prohibited, but doctors still, on occasion, perform it.

The history of euthanasia and assisted suicide starts from Ancient Greek, physicians used to perform frequent abortions, voluntary and involuntary mercy killings. People supported voluntary death and physicians often gave their patients the poisons on their request. The ancients supported the voluntary killing, if it was done for the right reasons. For centuries physician-assisted suicide had been understood to mean the process where the relief of pain for the dying was the best way to ensure an “easy death”. By the nineteenth century euthanasia was then described as actual mercy killing. It is a controversy today whether or not euthanasia is inhumane or not.

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.

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.