Introduction
Modern medicine and contemporary society are frequently confronted with contentious decisions. Perhaps no decision is more challenging to reconcile than that of euthanasia. The legalisation of euthanasia continues to be passionately debated. It has been a pertinent issue in human rights discourse as it affects ethical and legal issues pertaining to both the patient and the health care practitioner (Bartels & Otlowski, 2010).
The following essay will define euthanasia and make the distinction between active, passive, voluntary, non-voluntary, involuntary euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. Relevant legal issues within the Australian context will then be discussed. Ethical issues such as ‘sanctity of life’ versus ‘quality of life’, and the ‘slippery slope’ argument will also be explored. Ethical reflections regarding euthanasia will be considered from both a deontological and consequentialist perspective. Finally, personal opinion will be expressed based on ethical considerations.
What is Euthanasia?
Euthanasia means ‘good death’ from the Greek word ‘eu’ (good) and ‘thanatos’ (death) (Bartels & Otlowski, 2010). According to prominent Australian philosopher Peter Singer, euthanasia refers to, “the killing of those who are incurably ill and in great pain or distress, for the sake of those killed, and in order to spare them further suffering or distress” (Singer, 1993, p.175).
The different types of euthanasia are:
• Active Voluntary Euthanasia – medical
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.
The matter of euthanasia and assisted suicide is one of the most widely debated public policies in the UK today. Its legalisation will undoubtedly affect family and patient-doctor relationships and also challenge the concepts of what is considered to be ethical behaviour (Marker and Hamlon, 2005). But with overwhelming public support for its legalisation and unregulated assisted dying already common place in the medical profession (Doward 2004), surely a regulated system with the strictest safeguards in the world would be a preferable solution (Voluntary euthanasia society, 2004). The problems outlined by the 'slippery slope' theory and anti euthanasia groups present some powerful arguments against its legalisation, but after all, should it not be ones own choice of how and when to end their own life if they are suffering intolerable physical or mental pain (Doward 2004)?
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, 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
Euthanasia is a term derived from a Greek word meaning "happy or fortunate in death." It is most commonly used now to denote the "merciful" infliction of death [either actively or passively] to avoid torment in fatal and incurable disease, usually by consent of the patient or his family.
There are select places in the world that have legalized euthanasia. This is an important problem because the debate between opposing views question the ethics and the constitutional and human rights of these individuals who have chosen this route.
First, it is essential to define euthanasia in order to resolve any misconceptions. Euthanasia is the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma (Oxford dictionaries, 2014). It can be either passive or active however this essay will focus specifically on active euthanasia. Euthanasia is currently illegal in Australia, although it was briefly legal in the northern territory. This essay aims to explore the reasons why Public policy in Australia should legalize physician-assisted suicide. Although I have taken the stance of legalizing euthanasia in Australia I acknowledge that the issue is very complex and I can only begin to
Euthanasia seems a small word but actually is world in itself. It is concerned with the life and death of living creatures. When a person kills another painful person in order to bring him out from the painful situation, then the term is called euthanasia. Euthanasia comes from the Greek words, ‘EU ' meaning ‘good ' and ‘THANATOS ' meaning ‘death '. Bringing these together, euthanasia means ‘the good death ' (Chao). Euthanasia is an act of killing someone in order to relieve their pain.
In this chapter the author describe the issue of euthanasia and the issue of end of life practice in Australia. Euthanasia is refers to a practice being done intentionally to end the life of the people who are suffering from illness in order to relieve the pain and suffering. The main ideas in this chapter are about the arguments in life or death issue and the debate happening about what is right or wrong in euthanasia. Although some other countries already accept this practice of ending life, euthanasia in Australia is still illegal and the federal government continues the debate about the issue. It was found that majority of the Australian are already accept and support the legal option of ending life for those people who are suffering from
Today our team will be speaking on the topic “Should euthanasia be legalized in Australia?”. As the first affirmative speaker, I will be introducing the topic of Euthanasia. I will discuss the differences between palliative care and assisted dying, a patient’s right to die, and also highlight patient suffering.
Euthanasia, or voluntary assisted suicide, has been the subject of much moral, legal and human rights debate in Australia. Broadly speaking, this term is used to describe the termination of a person’s life to end their suffering, usually through the administration of drugs. The core of this debate is centred on how to mitigate and pacify competing values; an individual's desire to self autonomy and freedom and choice to die with dignity when suffering, alongside with the devaluation of human life as a consequence that is formed through the legalisation of euthanasia. Due to the nature of the topic of euthanasia that is shrouded with ethical controversy and ambiguity, there is difficulty in legal justification and establishment of voluntary
Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are actions that hit at the core of what it means to be human - the moral and ethical actions that make us who we are, or who we ought to be. Euthanasia, a subject that is so well known in the twenty-first century, is subject to many discussions about ethical permissibility which date back to as far as ancient Greece and Rome , where euthanasia was practiced rather frequently. It was not until the Hippocratic School removed it from medical practice. Euthanasia in itself raises many ethical dilemmas – such as, is it ethical for a doctor to assist a terminally ill patient in ending his life? Under what circumstances, if any, is euthanasia considered ethically appropriate? More so, euthanasia raises
Euthanasia is the Greek word meaning “good death”. Euthanasia is the act of assisting in ending one’s life, killing a person or an animal in a painless or minimally painful way.
Euthanasia is a controversial issue. Many different opinions have been formed. From doctors and nurses to family members dealing with loved ones in the hospital, all of them have different ideas for the way they wish to die. However, there are many different issues affecting the legislation and beliefs of legalizing euthanasia. Taking the following aspects into mind, many may get a different understanding as to why legalization of euthanasia is necessary. Some of these include: misunderstanding of what euthanasia really is, doctors and nurses code of ethics, legal cases and laws, religious and personal beliefs, and economics in end-of-life care.
Researching anything like euthanasia from an ethical perspective is always a laborious undertaking, as there are countless views and opinions held by many different scholars. It goes without mentioning that ethics are often a personal set of beliefs, and that simply because an intelligent or well respected philosopher has made a statement about the nature of ethics does not make it true. Oftentimes, ethics cannot be gleaned from the writings or speeches of great minds, but only inspired by them; accordingly, the vast majority of this paper is original content with the reasoning of others