Dr. Harold Glucksberg vs. The State of Washington Essays

980 Words 4 Pages
Dr. Harold Glucksberg vs. The State of Washington

'Choosing death before dishonor is seen by some philosophers and ethicists as a rational reason to commit suicide.' In the 1994 case of Glucksberg v. Washington (Otherwise acknowledged as Compassion In Dying v. The State Of Washington), Harold Glucksberg, alongside the right-to-die organization Compassion In Dying, filed a suit in opposition to the state of Washington for three fatally ill patients he treated.

Dr. Glucksberg and 'Compassion in Dying' set their case saying that the ban against doctor-assisted suicide was violating the right patients right of due process and placed an unjustified burden on terminally ill patients who required help to stop suffering misery from the
…show more content…
Why do people disagree with the euthanasia procedure? The reason for this lies in ethics. Of most religions people practice, death is thought to be the worst punishment possible. If death is the worst punishment, then suicide is thought to be a sense of punishment undeserved while you are in pain already because of a disease/sickness.

Morally Correct? As this may be true to people of faith, what is it to others? When a man or woman of any age is already dying physically, moving on to emotionally/ mentally and is in great pain every second they move or even as simple as opening their eyes, what is death then? Morally, that person sees it as a way to stop being nothing. They see the truth ? they?re dead anyway. What are other reasons to live but for other?s sake? If a person can no longer sit alone and watch the flowers dancing in the wind with the sun shinning on them (Or simply enjoy beauty in the world), then why should they live? What?s fair in these two senses? Because it seems that morals contradict ethics, what is fair? Should fair be to the individual suffering (like Dr. Glucksberg?s three patients) or to the people that stand by not experiencing the pain? I leave these questions open to you because not a single person can tell another what to believe is fair. It will always be seen as unfair or fair. There will always be someone who rebels.

?What interest can the state possibly have in requiring the