Euthanasia Controversy: To Die Or Right To Die?

Satisfactory Essays
The right-to-die also known as dying with dignity refers to various issues related to the decision of whether a person should be allowed to refuse extraordinary measures intended to prolong their life when they are terminally ill or comatose. It also refers to the idea that a person with a terminal illness should be allowed to commit suicide before death naturally occurs. This may be done by the withdrawal of feeding tubes and other artificial means of life support or with assistance from a physician.

In Euthanasia: Right to life vs right to die (Article One) researchers discussed various aspects of euthanasia from “active (introducing something to cause death) to passive (withholding treatment or supportive measures); voluntary (consent)
…show more content…
The controversy behind the right to die should often involves legal, ethical, medical, and human rights perceptive (Bada-Math & Chaturvedi).
One argument against embracing the right to die is that terminally ill people and people with debilitating diseases will be eliminated from our society. In India the people have a natural right to live and premature termination is considered to be unnatural with relation to right to life. This adds to the controversy because opponents believe euthanasia can lead to a decline in care.
Euthanasia opposers also believe that when a person attempts to commit suicide that they are suffering a form mental illness. Therefore, it is important to conduct a mental health evaluation of a person that is seeking euthanasia.
Another argument against the right to die is medical professionals should not participate in mercy killings of terminally ill patients. They also believe that there should be an emphasis on palliative care to add life to years instead adding years to life. The intention behind this is to provide care when there is no
Get Access