Arguments in favor of euthanasia say that people are capable of making rational decisions, even when they are suffering and terminally ill. These decisions are usually based upon moral or religious values as well as certain beliefs concerning the value and quality of human life (Robinson, 2016). Different arguments in favor of euthanasia include saying certain ways of dying are better than others called “The Good Death” or letting the patient die in dignity. This view gives the patient an advantage of not dying from their disease of from the injury. If the person is in pain it reduces their suffering, this is considered a favorable act for euthanasia. People will still attempt suicide if they can’t get a physician to perform euthanasia because it is “illegal”, euthanasia prepares the family for the death of a loved one and avoids the horrific scene of someone having to discover their lifeless body. The top argument against euthanasia is that no person can take the life of another, because in some cases active and involuntary euthanasia are considered to be murder. People feel as if a physician’s job is to help their patient and prevent their death, when others believe that physicians are not capable of preventing death completely and should respect the wishes of their patients. Another argument against would be suffering is “good” for the soul. Some people believe that suffering is payments for sins in the current world to guarantee them a better afterlife. Then there is
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysGet Access
Euthanasia refers to the intentional bringing about of the death of a patient, either by killing him/her, or by letting him/her die, for the patient's sake to prevent further pain or suffering from a terminal illness. Euthanasia is a complex issue in many underlying theological, sociological, moral, and legal aspects. Its legalization is heavily debated around the world, with strong arguments made for both sides of the issue. The supporters of euthanasia often repeated that "We have to respect the freedom of the patient" or "people should be able to exercise control over their own lives and death." However, Euthanasia, by nature, is "wrongfully killing" or "mercy killing", and if we allow any type of euthanasia, all sorts of negative
Many people would argue that it’s okay to end your life or someone else’s life, if they do not have the possibility of getting better and are terminally ill. Another reason is that maybe they have a mental illness or are a harm to themselves and others. On the other hand, some people believe that life has value and great worth and that being euthanized takes away that value in having life. There is much argument and debate over whether or not Euthanasia is ever justified. At the end of the day, it’s based on what a person believes is right. Everyone has the right to believe what they want to. However, Euthanasia can never be justified because it makes people believe that life is not worth living if you are terminally ill, deformed, in a coma, have a disability, feel that you are a burden to someone, in unbearable pain or have the right to commit suicide. No matter how bad life gets, people should know that life is always worth living. When someone consents to being euthanized or having someone else be euthanized, they may miss out on memories and life’s joys. There is a lot of pain in life that people have to deal with, but that does not mean that anyone has the right to decide that they or anyone else should die. This also does not give anyone the right to inject drugs into someone in order to kill them peacefully. It doesn’t matter if you are just trying to help
Euthanasia should be considered in all aspects of the medical field because people need to be in charge of their lives, statements from critics, and the serious evaluation process when chosen. Euthanasia can reserve all rights towards an individual’s choice towards death or not, because it is the person who has to endure and agonize through the incurable illness. An individual’s perspective on a situation is through their eyes and no one else, that is why euthanasia produces the choice of being alive or
Many people have different opinions on the debate of legalizing Euthanasia or Physician- assisted suicide. “The term assisted suicide has several different interpretations. Perhaps the most widely used and accepted is "the intentional hastening of death by a terminally ill patient with assistance from a doctor, relative, or another person". Some people will insist that something along the lines of "in order relieve intractable (persistent, unstoppable) suffering" needs to be added to the meaning, “(2) The major debate on euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are: the slippery slope to legalized murder, the right to die, and the Hippocratic oath and prohibition of killing. “Proponents of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (PAS) contend that terminally ill people should have the right to end their suffering with a quick, dignified, and compassionate death. They argue that the right to die is protected by the same constitutional safeguards that guarantee such rights as marriage, procreation, and the refusal or termination of life-saving medical treatment.” (1) I
Death and dying are a natural part of our lives. Not a day goes by that we do not take the chance of being run over by a car while running, being stabbed in a robbery, or being poisoned by bacteria in our food. In all of these cases, we have very little choice in deciding our fate. But what about those cases when we can do something to affect the dying process? What if we can decide whether we wish to live or die? For most of us, that is still uncharted territory, and just the thought of it chills us to the bone. Euthanasia is one such opportunity where a person can affect the dying process. It is not, as many people believe, a case of a physician killing a patient, but instead, a case where a patient who is facing a prolonged,
The first argument for legalising euthanasia indicates to autonomy and fundamental right. Life is extremely precious and must be protected but not at any circumstances, like, a patient who is suffering from physical pain cause of terminal ill and wishing to eradicate from the endless pain. It is a fundamental right to everyone to make decision about those things are momentous to us, like, how we die (Short, 2016). Therefore, many supporters of euthanasia perceive that everyone has the right to control their body and life, and should be free to decide at what time, and in which manner they will die (Brooks,
Many people are afraid to open the door to physician assisted suicide or euthanasia because it would cause many moral issues to become open to question. Who would qualify for physician assisted suicide/euthanasia? Only people with certain diseases or prognoses? Should the physician decide when to allow PAS/euthanasia, or should the patient be in full control of the decision? If legalized, would euthanasia be legalized murder? Is it the role of our law to enforce conformity on the country’s moral status? And when is it acceptable to give up on palliative care and allow this separation from life? In a Dutch survey of 1456 physicians, 1121 stated that they had received requests for physician assisted suicide/euthanasia (Emanuel). Although discussing suicide options for terminally ill patients is an extremely sensitive and complex issue, it becomes pertinent that their requests should be fully considered when so many patients in this position are begging for assistance in passing peacefully.
Euthanasia, also known as mercy killing, is defined by Dictionary.com as, “the act of putting to death painlessly or allowing to die, as by withholding extreme medical measures, a person or animal suffering from an incurable, especially a painful, disease or condition.” Euthanasia can be separated into two forms, active and passive. Active euthanasia is when a healthcare professional administers a lethal injection to a patient for a quick, painless death, whereas, passive euthanasia is the withdrawal of medical treatment from a patient by a healthcare professional. A common argument is that active euthanasia is morally worse than passive euthanasia. I disagree with this argument and feel that active euthanasia is morally no different from passive euthanasia because both produce the same results with the same intentions despite their method of action.
People have always analyzed the permission to die from various perspectives. Historically, representatives of different cultures have treated this natural stage of life as a release or a punishment for wrongful actions. For instance, samurais took their own lives that were honorable doings. On the contrary, some cultures still have capital punishment for crimes. Nevertheless, today public is lively discussing the issue of dying from the ethical point of view.
The ethical issue is Euthanasia, there are many groups that support or oppose this issue. Euthanasia is the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma. The different viewpoints are based around whether it is humane to assist someone in dying and whether it should be illegal for someone to assist the death of someone who has a terminal illness and are suffering incurable pain. Groups that oppose the issue generally believe that it is inhumane to end someone 's life early, these groups generally believe these people should be given care and as much comfort as possible until their last days. Groups that support the issue generally believe that if someone has lost their mental state or are suffering unbearable pain that cannot be cured, that they should be allowed the option of euthanasia because it is inhumane to make someone suffer unbearable pain if they do not need to. An ethical issue brings systems of morality and principles into conflict, ethical issues are more subjective and opinionated and generally cannot be solved with facts, laws and truth. Euthanasia is an ethical issue because there are two equally unacceptable options. It is considered wrong
First of all, it is inevitable that the argument “euthanasia being morally permissible” is relevant to the philosophical theory “Utilitarianism” which generally fixates on increasing happiness and decreasing misery to an
Euthanasia comes from Greek as good death or easy death, something that humans and animal wish for. Euthanize is a shoot vets give animals to put them asleep forever. People have been asking is it right or wrong to euthanize. Some say we should not, for how do we know that the animals want to be killed. Others say that we can use it as a way to control the population and to prevent overcrowding in animal shelters. A brief bio of euthanize in history and three pros and three cons of it.
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”).
Death is inevitable, most of us do not know when or how, but it happens to everyone. The thought of planning your death or having a doctor help complete the task is hard to contemplate. What if you were dying, you had a terminal illness that you would never recover from, imagine as the part of the disease process you would slowly lose your ability to: care for yourself, feed yourself, you would lose your memory, and the ability to walk or talk. What if during this process you would have pain and agony beyond words and despite trying all the medical options available there was just no relief. Life is sometimes unfair and we are faced with tough decisions, what if a you had the opportunity to do the things on your bucket list, make amends with family or friends and when you got to the point that you couldn’t stand the pain and agony anymore you could say goodbye and take a pill and go to sleep and it would be the end of suffering. I believe that voluntary active euthanasia is morally acceptable for terminally ill people.
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.