De-Criminalizing Euthanasia

Assisted suicide is an ethical topic that has sparked up many controversies. Individuals have heated disputes on whether or not patients who are suffering should have the right to die. Some worry that legalizing euthanasia is irrational and would violate some religions, while others argue that it provides a peaceful death towards terminally ill patients who are suffering from pain. Physician-assisted suicide is a contentious matter, in which there are many positive and negative aspects, whether or not it should be committed is a complex decision.

Others have argued that physician assisted suicide is not ethically permissible, because it contradicts the traditional duty of physician’s to preserve life and to do no harm. Furthermore, many argue that if physician assisted suicide is legalized, abuses would take place, because as social forces condone the practice, it will lead to “slippery slope” that forces (PAS) on the disabled, elderly, and the poor, instead of providing more complex and expensive palliative care. While these arguments continue with no end in sight, more and more of the terminally ill cry out in agony, for the right to end their own suffering.

The ethical dilemma of this highly controversial subject will continue to split our approach to the notion of assisted suicide. As we age, we come to terms with our own mortality, how we choose to leave this world isn’t always up us. For those who suffer from a terminal fate, maybe they should have the choice, and those who understand their current condition can provide them the dignity they deserve without repercussions. The only way we as a society can move ahead, is to find a common

It has been argued that everyone has the right to a choice and allowing physician-assisted suicide (PAS) would give patients just that. Although this is true, not only would PAS give patients a choice, it would also threaten them, along with the elderly and the disabled. PAS can cultivate a completely immoral way of thinking in people who are not the elderly, dying, or disabled. It can cause them to think that these people in question are burdens and that “ending a disabled person's life is in everyone's interest” (Asch). This way of thinking would intimidate many patients and lead to them feeling less of themselves, more of a weight in society than a

"What can those of us who sympathize with a justified suicide by a handicapped person do to help? When we have statutes on the books permitting lawful

[The criminal code of Canada states] “everyone who councils, aids, or abets someone to commit suicide whether or not suicide ensures , is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years.” 1 It is this law which violates the human right to life as well as creates a widely spread controversy over whether or not euthanasia should become legalized in Canada. 2 Legalizing euthanasia would create many benefits for those who suffer from a terminal illness, giving them freedom and control over their own lives. Euthanasia should be legalized in Canada; this is because the euthanasia law is not consistently applied, it would create medical advances for Canada which would bring the country up to speed with other countries around the world, and legalizing euthanasia would benefit those who wish to die by preventing inhumane suicidal crimes from occurring. 3

Physician-assisted suicide (PAS), refers to self-administration of medication prescribed to a patient by their physician to end his or her life, and euthanasia, the administering of lethal drugs by a physician to end a patient’s life (Lachman, 2015) are extremely controversial topics. For several decades, supporters for the legalization of PAS and euthanasia have served as advocates for terminally ill patients who wish to have an alternative to a long, drawn out, painful death. These supporters have argued that death with dignity should be an option for these patients based on the ethical principles of autonomy and self- determination. With PAS being legal in several European countries as well as several US states, this provocative

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.

As humans, we have the right to life. In Canada, in section 7 of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canadians can expect “life, liberty and security of the person.” This means not only to simply exist, but have a minimum quality and value in each of our lives. Dying is the last important, intimate, and personal moment, and this process of dying is part of life. Whether death is a good or bad thing is not the question, as it is obviously inevitable, but as people have the right to attempt to make every event in their life pleasant, so they should have the right to make their dying as pleasant as possible. If this process is already very painful and unpleasant, people should have the right to shorten the unpleasantness. In February of this year, judges declared that the right to life does not mean individuals “cannot ‘waive’ their right to life.” Attempting suicide is not illegal in Canada, but the issue here is for those whose physical handicaps prevent them from doing so, and to allow access to a safe, regulated and painless form of suicide. It is a very difficult, sensitive and much-debated subject which seeks to balance the value of life with personal autonomy. In this essay, I will argue that the philosophical case for pro-euthanasia is more complete than those arguments against it due to the

Euthanasia, or voluntary assisted suicide, has been the subject of much moral, religious, philosophical, legal and human rights debate in Australia. Euthanasia is defined as the intentional act of terminating one’s life, who is suffering from an incurable illness or a terminal disease. This act requires explicit consent from the person who wishes to die and it must also be done out of concern and compassion for that person who is suffering. Several legislative attempts have been made to legalise euthanasia in parts of Australia. However, at the present time, it remains unlawful. With Euthanasia being illegal all across Australia it has forced our citizens overseas to unregulated medical centres in hope of having access to a

Lane talks about how euthanasia of mentally impaired patients is controversial. He provides the reader with descriptive details of a physician-suicide that occurred in the Netherlands in 2016. Lane describes the physician-assisted death of a 74-year-old woman that had dementia. The women did not provide a clear explanation of why she was wanting to have a lethal injection other than she was suffering from an uncurbable disease. The doctor sedated the elderly woman and she pulled back from the needle as the doctor was trying to locate a vein.

Assisted Suicide has through out history caused controversy among our society. There are two sides to this issue, one that passionately supports it, and those who religiously disagree. I believe that assisted suicide should become legal for several reasons. Assisted suicide gives individuals the right to end their suffering when they personally feel that their time has come to die. Assisted suicide should become legal because if one can decide to put an animal out of its misery, why shouldn’t that person have the same right to put themselves out of their own misery if that hardship came upon them. Though the topic may seem morbid, dying people in grave medical circumstances have rights. It’s important we recognize their right to end their own suffering and respect the very personal decisions these people are forced to make.

As a species, humans are born, grow, and eventually pass away. Individuals can die from various causes ranging from accidents and illnesses, to murder. Illnesses can cause a great deal of pain and suffering which individuals have to face prior to death. As a result, some choose to speed up the process of death instead of prolonging the pain any longer. Euthanasia refers to the “act of putting to death painlessly or allowing death, as by withholding extreme medical measures” (Cokeram 5). The legalization of euthanasia is a source of social change economically, legally, and socially by providing individuals with the freedom to end their own suffering.

A major problem that is facing our society today is the legalization of assisted suicide or as it is also known, euthanasia. Euthanasia is the act of putting a person to death painlessly, or allowing a person to die by withholding medical treatment in cases of incurable diseases. Assisted suicide has been legalized in five out of the fifty United States and legal in over eight different countries. Euthanasia is done when a physician administers a lethal dose of pain killing medication, while assisted suicide is when the physician leaves a syringe that is filled for the patient to inject themselves when they are ready. Euthanasia has been common in the world for centuries, throughout several cultures and regions, in the twentieth century a group

Today, voluntary euthanasia is getting closer to being legalized in more than just one state in the United States. “‘Voluntary’ euthanasia means that the act of putting the person to death is the end result of the person’s own free will” (Bender 19). “ Voluntary euthanasia is an area worthy of our serious consideration, since it would allow patients who have exhausted all other reasonable options to choose death rather than continue suffering” (Bender 19). The question of whether or not voluntary euthanasia should be legalized is a major debate that has been around for years. Because the issue of whether people should have the right to choose how they want to live or die is so complex. With the advances in technology today we have made