Pros And Cons Of Assisted Suicide And 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.

Assisted suicide is when you give someone else permission like a physician, to kill you. Assisted suicide is legal in at least six states (Tolle, 1996) and there is lots of people who wanted to die because the disease they might have at the moment is just too much for them. If a patient that wanted to die the they would either talk to a physician or their doctor and give the doctor permission to just kill the patient. Assisted suicide can only happen when your medication is not working and the pain from the sickness you have is just abdominale. There was a case that was about how a man who was going through chemotherapy he didn't want to go through it so he talked to his doctor about assisted suicide. They decided to

Assisted suicide is the suicide of a terminally- ill patient, achieved by using a prescribed drug from a doctor for that specific purpose. It is legal in only six states in the United States of America including: Oregon, Montana, Washington, Colorado, Vermont, and California. Countries such as Germany, Japan, and Switzerland have legalized assisted suicide in past years. It has been disputed for many years and continues to be a controversial issue whether physicians should be authorized to end an individual’s life with their prescription and if this should be done legally.

Many people in the world are suffering from illness that cannot be cured. They live their last days in pain and suffering wondering when and why it happened to them. Instead of suffering, many people dream of suicide to take their pain away but they know no one would understand. In very few states, it is legal for people to get assistance to put them out of their pain and suffering. It is called assisted suicide. Assisted suicide is the help from a physician to end their patients’ lives with their permission. The patient must have a terminal illness with less than six months to live to qualify. Many people are against assisted suicide because they believe that it is just a cover for murder. People should be thought of as dying with dignity

People who die of a prolonged illness or had a predictable steady decline due to a condition like heart disease, diabetes, or Alzheimer’s disease account for ninety percent of deaths each year (Girsh 45). Most of the people who died suffered greatly because of their disease. However, if euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide was legal, the suffering could have been severely lessened. People who oppose both options have many reasons why euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide should not be legal. The Hippocratic Oath, the fear they could be abused by the poor, Nazi-styled teachings might return, or people may feel coerced, and the right to die is not an actual right are a few examples of what the people who oppose euthanasia or physician-assisted

Assisted suicide is a significant topic that worries individuals everywhere throughout the United States. Some are against it on account of religious and other reasons. Others are for it because of their compassion and respect for the dying. For many the main concern with assisted suicide lies with the competence of the terminally ill. When people see the word euthanasia, they see the meaning of the word in two different lights. Euthanasia for some conveys a negative connotation; similar to that of murder. But after studying both sides of the issue, a compassionate individual must conclude that competent terminal patients should be given the right to assisted suicide in order to end their suffering, reduce the damaging financial effects of

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.

The civil argument in the U.S. over whether or not to authorize physician-assisted suicide and active euthanasia has reached new levels of vehemence. Oregon, California, Vermont, and Washington (and Montana, via court ruling) have become the first states to legalize physician-assisted suicide. There has, too, been campaigning, ballot measures, bills, and litigation in other states in attempts to legalize one or both practices. Supporters increasingly urge either absolute legalization or another form of legitimation, through claims of “mercy killing” when compared to homicide. As stated by representatives of the Ethics and Human Rights Committee, “Many people fear a painful and protracted death or desire more control over the dying process” (209).

Opponents of the new law restricting assisted suicide to all living beings believe that the new law decreases the value of a human life. Assisted suicide in the beginning appears like a good thing to have available. However, on closer examination, there are many reasons legalization is an extremely serious mistake. Supporters often focus merely on artificial issues of choice and self-determination. Assisted suicide would have many unintended consequences.

As of the recent year there has been views and thoughts regarding “assisted suicide”. It is a hot topic due to the fact that a physician would help a terminally-ill patient end their life early without the pain and time consuming grief. Terminally-ill patients should have the right and choice to end their life at their own wishes in the state of California. Not only is it an eyebrow raising topic but it helps those in pain along with having benefits that would affect the general population. The article “California senate sends aid-in-dying bill to Governor Brown” by Patrick McGreevy, expresses the journey the bill has had on its way to jerry brown.

Today, the resolution for the debate is “Let it be resolved that euthanasia should be morally permissible for the disabled and children”. To begin with, one must comprehend the essence of “euthanasia” and “morally permissible” to follow the arguments in this debate. According to the Oxford Dictionary, euthanasia is “the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma”. Whereas, morally permissible according to Deni Elliot, in her book “Ethics the First Person” means the “behaviour that is tolerated by the moral system”. With regards to Euthanasia, it is classified as active and passive. In layman’s terms, “Active Euthanasia” is when the immediate result of death is not from the patient’s disease but a medical action was done to result their death such as providing a lethal drug. In the other hand, “Passive Euthanasia” is when the death is caused by the patient’s disease which enables to advance naturally without any influence of treatment which might prolong the patients’ life. As I have stated my clarifications, I am hereby to present three arguments within the PRO side of the debate.

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

I support Euthanasia, because it is the patient’s choice. “People have the right to die in a humane way”(“8 Main Pros and Cons of Legalizing Physician Assisted Suicide”). People with terminal illnesses go through horrible pain and suffering during the last months of their lives. Euthanasia helps a terminally ill person to avoid excruciating pain and embrace a dignified death. Patients should have the choice of whether or not they want to go through the pain. According to the article, “The right to die is a moral principle based on the belief that a human being is entitled to end their own life or to undergo voluntary euthanasia” (“Right To Die”).

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.

Voluntary euthanasia, or physician-assisted suicide, has been a controversial issue for many years. It usually involves ending a patient’s life early to relieve their illness. Most of the controversy stemmed from personal values like ethics or religion. The euthanasia debate puts a huge emphasis on what doctors should do for their patients and how much a person’s life is worth. Supporters of euthanasia primarily focus on cost and pain alleviation. Opponents of euthanasia tend to focus on morality. Whether euthanasia is legal or not could significantly affect future generations’ attitudes about death. Euthanasia should be legalized nationally because it helps patients that could be in unimaginable pain, offers more options for more people, and it is relatively inexpensive compared to the alternatives.