Persuasive Essay On Euthanasia

Euthanasia is the act of administering a medication that intentionally kills patients, in a painless way, who are in a battle against terminal illness. It gives those who are both mentally and physically weak the option to end their sufferings, which can lead to abusive behavior of this medication. The act of administering euthanasia forces doctors to put a value on someone’s life in order to use this medication which makes their job immensely stressful. Also, the act of euthanasia gives off negative energy to those suffering by making a society devalue their lives to the point where euthanasia seems like the best option rather than living. Societies, professionals,

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.

Doctors are whom people delegate their lives to when there is something wrong with their health. Death is perhaps the most personal, intimate event of any time. One may believe suffering towards the end of death should be avoided with Euthanasia. Various sources disapprove of the legalization of euthanasia. I believe that all people deserve the right to die in natural timing.

Around 7 million people are diagnosed with a terminal illness each year. Fifty-five percent of terminally ill patients die in pain. Some are forced to be bed ridden for months knowing a slow death is coming. Would you want to live, knowing you are completely dependent on nurses and family to take care of your every need? Patients should be given the option to end their life early with a painless death, instead of waiting for the inevitable to happen.

Although there is a distinction between euthanasia and death with dignity, the purpose of both is to end one’s unbearable pain and suffering.

In 1994, physician-assisted suicide became legal in Oregon which was the only state during that time. Physician-assisted suicide, also euthanasia, is when a physician provides a patient with the medical means or the medical knowledge to commit suicide. Particular words are so sensitive that individuals across the world are still, to this day, attempting to delete the Death with Dignity Act. The notion legalizing assisted suicide frightens citizens; however, they do not know how the patient feels. Laws like this should be used to open the minds of citizens who believe that physician-assisted dying is morally wrong and help patients in pain. Patients with a terminal illness should be allowed assisted suicide because their organs can be used freely to save another's life, they can pass knowing it was their choice, and it can decrease the hospital costs of the patients.

“Euthanasia is known as mercy killing [or assisted suicide] in order to painlessly terminate one’s life with the humane motive of ending his or her suffering,” states Dr. M. Maisie. Even though it can be argued that euthanasia is no different from a homicide, euthanasia is no the chance to alleviate agony of terminally ill patient. It is unfair and inhuman to force suffering upon any living thing, and we see animals being shown the compassion that many patients wish they had. Euthanasia saves money that could be used to cure patients. Furthermore, death is inevitable for everyone; it is one of the few things promised in life. But isn’t

Envision one of your family members being diagnosed with end-stage cancer that has spread throughout their entire body. They are helplessly suffering from pain that cannot be controlled with any type of treatment or pain medications. Meanwhile your cousin has been watching her father slowly die and lose all quality of life. While some doctors believe that assisted suicide is morally wrong, it is the right way to end the pain and suffering of terminal illnesses in certain situations. If that family member could have been given the option of assisted suicide, they wouldn’t have to go through so much unnecessary suffering and they could die with dignity.

Assisted suicide is when the suicide of a patient suffering from an incurable disease, affected by the taking of lethal drugs provided by a doctor for this purpose. It’s a personal decision and no one should make that decision for them. It’s their life and they should be able to decide what to do with it.

Proponents of euthanasia argue that terminally ill patients should be allowed to decide when they want their suffering to end and assisted suicide could give them control over their

Euthanasia is the painless killing of a patient suffering from a terminal illness. When most people bring upon this subject it opens a very broad debate. It could easily be seen in both a negative way and positive way. Some people see it as more of murder and morally incorrect, but some view it as a way to keep someone from suffering until their death. There are ways to cure colds, fevers, broken bones, etc. but for those who are terminally ill, have to live in pain and agony knowing it won’t get better. Despite plentiful hard evidence to the contrary, the same way we have the right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, we should have to right to death. Also, government shouldn’t be able to define our end-of-life decisions, or our bodily choices. Lastly, keeping the patient alive costs more money and emotional distress than to keep them suffering with no hope of getting better.

Everyone has experienced an extreme pain at some point in their life. This pain could be physical or emotional; but could you imagine being told you have to live with that pain until you die that could be days, months, or years from now? What if you were then told that you were going to die soon from that pain? Would you choose physician assisted suicide (PAS) if you didn’t want to suffer anymore? Euthanasia is defined as the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable disease or an irreversible coma. However, if it is what you want who should stand in your way; some of the states in the United States are legalizing this option. In order to make sure this option is the right one, there is a criterion the patient must meet as well as a few other protocols. If euthanasia is legal in some states, why shouldn’t it be legal in all and should it be legal in general? I believe it should be legal in all states.

Euthanasia, a medically assisted suicide carried out by a medical professional such as a physician or doctor in order to relieve one of pain, is a controversial procedure that is illegal in many parts of the globe (Medical News Today). Pain, both physical and emotional, is seen sometimes as inescapable making euthanasia a necessary procedure to help those in need. While being illegal in many places, euthanasia is best seen as a great alternative option for those suffering and wanting to end the pain they’re undergoing (Medical News Today).

Euthanasia, one of the most debatable topics in our time, has slowly gained approval by some countries. The first country to accept euthanasia was the Netherlands and little by little has gained some momentum. According to an article in Medical News Today the definition of euthanasia is “assisted suicide by a physician or doctor with the intent of ending someone’s life to relieve persistent suffering” (Nordqvist, 2016). In the United States, there are only six states that consider euthanasia legal and they are California, Colorado, Oregon, Vermont, Washington, and the DC area, with Montana allowing it with the approval of the courts. In the remaining states, it is still considered illegal to practice euthanasia and assisted suicide (ProCon.org, 2017).

The debate over the use of euthanasia is ever growing. This is due to the fact of constant increases in medical advances. Medical advances are growing the number of medicines one can be given before palliative care is an option. The main concern of the debate is whether trying new treatments and medicines are necessary before palliative care is given. Two articles will be analyzed using the Aristotelian method. Both articles are valid, but the New York Times article written by Haider Javed Warraich offers a complete perspective using all three persuasive appeals compared to the article written by Terry Pratchett for The Guardian, which the majority is written on emotion.