MICHELLE JU 433V

Euthanasia is a controversial debate in society today. Dr. Nitschke wrote an essay titled “Euthanasia: Hope You Need it, but be Glad the Option is There”. Dr. Nitschke’s purpose of writing this article was to conduct an essay covering the euthanasia topic. Nitschke is a director of the pro-euthanasia organization, while having a career in medicine for twenty five years. Nitschke fully supports the use of euthanasia.

Today, there is a large debate over the situation and consequences of euthanasia. Euthanasia is the act of ending a human’s life by lethal injection or the stoppage of medication, or medical treatment. It has been denied by most of today’s population and is illegal in the fifty states of the United States. Usually, those who undergo this treatment have a disease or an “unbearable” pain somewhere in the body or the mind. Since there are ways, other than ending life, to stop pain caused by illness or depression, euthanasia is immoral, a disgrace to humanity, according to the Hippocratic Oath, and should be illegal throughout the United States.

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.

According to Rachels (248), a proponent of euthanasia, states the act is justified if death is the only way out of one’s awful pain. On the other hand, Gay Williams (353), an opponent of euthanasia, views it as immoral to take someone’s life before his or her own natural death time reaches. Medically, euthanasia can be acceptable for those patients that are extremely suffering and their doctors have no idea on what to do to help a patient whose condition is only worsening. Often, it is administered on consultation with the family members of the patient in question. However, health practitioners are held within the bounds of professionalism where they are made to understand sanctity of life. Doctors are not supposed to decide the future of

The ten areas included, symptoms, social supports, communication with health providers, spiritual meaning, care needs, end of life plans, economic burdens, sociodemographics, preferences regarding end-of-life care and euthanasia and assisted suicide, and stress of the interview (Ezekiel et al., 2000). The findings from the surveys showed that in hypothetical scenarios, 60.2% of the terminally ill patients supported euthanasia or assisted suicide, despite the fact that only 10.6% of the patients seriously contemplated it for themselves (Ezekiel et al., 2000). Many factors play into individuals choosing not to take their own life, even if they believe that others should have the right to. For example, the patients that had loved ones present in their lives were not as likely to take their own lives, but the patients that were alone, causing them to be depressed, as well as the patients who needed more intense care, were much more likely to see euthanasia or assisted suicide as a legitimate option (Ezekiel et al., 2000). 58.7% of the caregivers supported the use of euthanasia for their patients who were in pain (Ezekiel et al., 2000). After the surveys were completed, follow up interviews were conducted six months later in order to see how the patients and caregivers views might have changed (Ezekiel et al., 2000).

The right to die act is referred to as physician-assisted suicide or human euthanasia. The concept allows a person to choose to end his or her own life with medication, prescribed by a physician. This act has recently been implemented into the State laws of Oregon, Washington, California, and most recently, Colorado. As a result, the topic of hman euthanasia has increasingly become an ethical dilemma. Supporting and opposing arguments have been stated, analyzed, and ridiculed without any resolution. The present paper is intended to give an overview of such arguments regarding human euthanasia, ethically and legally. In addition to the ethical dilemma, the importance of patient rights, advocacy, and sensitive nursing care is introduced.

Euthanasia remains highly controversial in the U.S. because even a state such as Oregon which upholds the Death with Dignity Act “passed by a margin of 51% to 49% as stated by the Oregon Health Authority. Thus, even though Niles suggested that Oregon supports euthanasia, the Death with Dignity Act seemingly remains controversial because almost half of the population in Oregon is against Euthanasia, and there are stakeholders who still challenge its implementation. In the context of this paper, euthanasia refers to an instance in which “the physician would act directly, for instance by giving a lethal injection, to end the patient’s life” (Niles 254). Clearly, euthanasia remains illegal in most parts of the country, and this is because it is a contentious moral and legal issue according to Haberman. There are numerous arguments which support and oppose euthanasia. Even so, the benefits of euthanasia outnumber its detriments. This implies that euthanasia should be legalized across the remaining states in the U.S. The legalization of euthanasia would have economic, ethical/moral, legal, and personal benefits.

After researching voluntary and assisted euthanasia interviews were conducted on a spiritual leader, hospital administer, health care colleague and a friend. The interviews inquired about the interviewees personal perspectives regarding euthanasia. The follow paper demonstrates the blue group’s combined opinion on voluntary and assisted euthanasia based off the interviews conducted and personal values.

Active euthanasia is a subject that is raising a lot of concern in today’s society on whether or not it should be legalized and under what circumstances should it be allowed. This is a very tricky subject due to its ability to be misused and abused. There are a wide variety of things that need to be considered when it comes to who should be allowed to request active euthanasia such as, is it an autonomous choice, do they have a terminal illness, is their quality of life dramatically decreased, and are they in pain and suffering. Both James Rachel and Daniel Callahan have very different opinions on active euthanasia and whether or not it should be allowed. However both authors manage to provide a substantial argument on where they stand regarding active euthanasia.

The right to live one’s life on his or her own terms is a basic tenet in the modern world. In American society, the people are given free reign (within legal and social boundaries, of course) to choose how to live. They can choose where to go to school, what to learn, what they want to work, when they want to retire, and so on and so forth. However, when people reach the end of their lives, this right to autonomy seems to be restricted, especially in those who are terminally ill. This autonomy sees itself at the center of the debate around the practice of euthanasia, a medical procedure in which a patient with a terminal or incurable illness is permitted to die in a painless manner (“Euthanasia”). While one might think that allowing one who

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

As the development of industry, the incidence of cancer is growing faster and faster. The issue about whether the government should legalize the euthanasia has been discussed in many countries around the world. Only several countries and a few states in US have legalized the mercy killing. This is a very important issue which need to discuss and find a solution for those people who are suffering from

One of the biggest and most controversial topics throughout society today is the act of euthanasia in humans. In the medical field, euthanasia is commonly known as assisted suicide that is essentially for terminally ill patients only. When thinking about euthanasia, Americans tend to relate it towards the rights for animals, but in this specific example I will focus on the controversial topic of legalization on behalf of people who are professionally diagnosed with a life-threatening diseases. This will not include minorities under the age of eighteen or the elderly over the age of sixty. Thus when looking at the data in today’s society, euthanasia is clearly defined as taking action of ending a person’s

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.

In cases where an individual's quality of life is irreparably diminished by terminal illness, one may seek to end their life with the help of a doctor. This has been a solution for patient suffering in neighboring countries, but there are ethical and legal issues that make it an impractical solution for American healthcare. Considering the results of negative potential of euthanasia practices exposes its flaws, and sheds light on better alternatives. Therefore active euthanasia, not to be confused with physician assisted suicide, should not be legalized in the United States.