Arguments Over Euthanasia

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-

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.

Euthanasia refers to the intentional act of ending one’s life to remove intractable pain and suffering to the patient. It is also known as physician- assisted suicide (Argument For Euthanasia - Advantages and disadvantages.). Euthanasia can be classified as voluntary where the patient gives consent to have their life ended, non-voluntary, where the patient is not in a position to make the decision on themselves, but a close relative takes the initiative to make the decision. It can also be involuntary where the decision to end life is made without the expressed wishes of the patient (Jecker, Jonsen, and Pearlman).In most countries, euthanasia is considered illegal and is viewed as murder. There are mixed feelings worldwide towards

Euthanasia has been a difficult controversy all over the world throughout time. Generations of people have been arguing the ethics and morality of this practice. I propose to unearth new discoveries, share issues surrounding the topic, and to explain to the reader why they should care.

I believe that it is acceptable for patients who are terminally ill and are in pain to be allowed to end their life. I think physician assisted suicide should only be available if all other treatments have been exhausted. When the patient is in so much pain that waiting until death is physically excruciating I believe options should be available. Advance directives are something that I believe everyone should have whether they think they are going to be in that position or not. I don’t think that the government should have any part in deciding if you are in a position to ask for that or not. It is an extremely personal decision that should be decided by the patient and their

The controversy of a doctor assisting their patient who is already dying, end their life sooner to save them from continuous unnecessary pain and agony has been the topic of controversy for years. The practice of euthanasia is in my opinion a mercy and should not be banned because in reality it doesn’t physically hurt anyone. You could say it hurts the patient but then again that patient is already in tremendous pain or in an incapacitated state of no recovery, as in paralyzed or brain damage etc., so in reality it would actually help them by assisting ending their pain by assisted suicide. A doctors job is also always help their patients and the practice of assisted suicide in many ways is actually helping the person. However there has and probably always will be people who do not agree with the idea of a dying person end their life for sooner than nature had intended. This demographic would suggest that by dying by your own hand or assisted by a physician for medical reasons is still considered plain suicide. And for the religious people it is a sin by their beliefs. The people could also argue that it is not a person’s right to make that decision.

Euthanasia is defined as: the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma (Dictionary Reference). For countless years Euthanasia has been a controversial topic in the Canadian legal system. Many people believe that the act of assisting in a suicide should remain illegal because it can shorten the life of humans; however, others believe that assisting in a suicide should be legal only if the person in question is suffering from a terminal illness. The euthanasia controversy struck Canada when a man by the name of Robert Latimer killed his daughter because she was suffering from a fatal disease. At birth Latimer’s daughter, Tracy, suffered severe brain damage due to an oxygen

avoid talking about. People have all sorts of differing opinions about what should and what shouldn’t be legal. The methods of Euthanasia are not as inhumane as many tend to believe it is. Also, the variety of choices the patient can mulligan over is actual quite diverse in most cases.

Misdiagnosis is one of the largest factors as to why voluntary euthanasia should not be legalized. How much do you actually trust medical accuracy? Being misdiagnosed is one of the greatest fears one can have when battling a terminal illness, and is more common than one may think. Researchers at John Hopkins Hospital in Baltimore reviewed tissue samples from 6,000 cancer patients nationwide. It showed that one out of 71 cases turned out misdiagnosed where the biopsy labeled cancer when it wasn’t. (CNN). Erica Riel testified against physician-assisted suicide at the public hearing on January 29, 2013, before two Senate committees. Erica had been diagnosed with a terminal illness three times by Vermont doctors, only to learn later that that

Euthanasia is the idea of helping a person who decided they wanted to die meet their end quickly and painlessly. This is also called assisted suicide. Most of the cases of euthanasia are related to a terminally ill person who wishes to end their life as easy as possible, rather than suffering through the effects of the illness killing them. The topic of euthanasia is one of the biggest controversies in medicine today, due to the religious and ethical problems of interfering with the “natural right to a natural death” (Dowbiggin, I. R., 2003, p. 2).

Medical ethics is always seen by many as an unusual blend; one many always seem to question. The fuse appeals to a range of different temperaments, to the philosopher, the doctor, and to the man or woman of action. It tackles the big questions of the morality of killing and the painstakingly difficult decisions having to be made by many on a daily basis. It also relates to the ethical spectrum as well, when can a mentally ill person be treated against their will? Is it a crime for any doctor to practice a form of euthanasia? Where better to start medical ethics, than with the complex topic of euthanasia.

Euthanasia is the intentional killing by act or omission of a dependent human being for his or her alleged benefit. Euthanasia and assisted suicide are like abortions, the only difference is that abortions targets human life at its earliest stages and euthanasia targets the late stages of life, the sick and disabled persons; these act often masked by euphemism such as “ death with dignity”. The act can be considered voluntary, involuntary (against the expressed wishes of the patient) or non-voluntary (no request and no consent were given by the patient). Active euthanasia, such as a lethal injection is given, Passive euthanasia is by omission of necessary care giving.

The debates about euthanasia date all the way back to the 12th century. During this time, Christian values increased the public’s opinion against euthanasia. The church taught its followers that euthanasia not only injured individual people and their communities, but also violated God’s authority over life. This idea spread far and wide throughout the public until the 18th century when the renaissance and reformation writers attacked the church and its teachings. However, the public did not pay much attention to the writings and still opposed euthanasia. Then, in 1828, New York became the first state to outlaw assisted suicide as well as euthanasia. After that, many states followed suit and, 40 years later, most states had made assisted suicide and euthanasia a crime. Nevertheless, the fight to legalize euthanasia still went on and, in 1870, Samuel Williams proposed using morphine as a way to quicken the death of a terminally ill patient. His proposal accumulated widespread acknowledgement in medical journals and scientific meetings, but in 1885 the American Medical Association took a stance against Williams’ proposal and ended all discussions.

Euthanasia, which is also referred to as mercy killing, is the act of ending someone’s life either passively or actively, usually for the purpose of relieving pain and suffering. “All forms of euthanasia require an intention to accelerate death in order to benefit patients experiencing a poor quality of life” (Sayers, 2005). It is a highly controversial subject that often leaves a person with mixed emotions and beliefs. Opinions regarding this topic hinge on the health and mental state of the victim as well as method of death. It raises legal issues as well as the issue of morals and ethics. Euthanasia is divided into two different categories, passive euthanasia and active euthanasia. “There are unavoidable uncertainties in both active and

Patients with advanced dementia commonly develop difficulty eating, often when they become bedridden and dependent in all activities of daily living (Finucane, 1999). #3 Due to this fact many dementia patients are placed on feeding tubes in their end-of-care stage. It has been suggested that there are times in which feeding tubes are administered for ease and convenience for health care professionals, rather than necessity. This idea stems from the fact that there is no proven research showing that tube feeding extents a patient’s life. A study was conducted to prove or disprove this statement. It was found that patients with feeding tubes still suffered from malnutrition and weight loss. Other aspects were also reviewed, including the prevention of pressure ulcers, infections, function and comfort. After all points were reviewed it was noted that tube feeding provided no substantial benefit to the patient. Tube feeding may not prolong life expectancy but simply be a reality when facing the final stages of dementia. This reality is a frightening factor for most facing this dementia, which leads to suggest that alternative options like euthanasia may seem justified.