Arguments Against Euthanasia Research

Recently, in the news, society has been exposed to the corruption of the judicial system. Americans, being tried for a heinous crime, would often be convicted with lesser sentences rather than the ones seemingly insignificant. In the novel, The Shadow of the Wind, Carlos Ruiz Zafón describes the real world by using imagery and includes vague details in regards to character development, therefore fabricating a mystery. A bookseller’s son, Daniel tries to unravel the disappearance of his favorite author. Around every corner, something in his findings are repeatedly tangling.

Out of the 196 countries in the world, only nine countries have legalized euthanasia or assisted suicide,” a quote brought up by Storypick. (). Euthanasia is one of the most controversial topics currently, but what can euthanasia offer patients and people all around the United States? People have different opinions and facts about euthanasia; so what are the pros and cons? In the end, euthanasia should be legalized because people will face pain mental and physical, people’s opinions should not be deterred as well with a death that will contain dignity, despite the moral thoughts it goes against. 10.2

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 defined as, "The act or practice of putting to death painlessly a person suffering from an incurable disease." Euthanasia can be traced back as far back as the ancient Greek and Roman civilizations. It was sometimes allowed in these civilizations to help others die. Voluntary euthanasia was approved in these ancient societies. Today, the practice of euthanasia causes great controversy. Both pro-life groups and right-to-die groups present arguments for their different sides. Pro-life groups make arguments and present fears against euthanasia. I contend that the case for the right to die is the stronger argument.

Millions of precious lives have been deliberately taken throughout the world due to the new Euthanasia Law. Euthanasia is the practicing of assisted suicide, due to terminally ill patients or depression. The practicing has just been legalized September 2015, and will be put into effect in California January 1 2016. Although, it is still being argued if adolescents should have the right fro this and if it’s morally correct all together. Euthanasia should be illegal throughout the world, because people shouldn’t be the ones to decide their own death.

There are many commandments in America. Some are written and some are just proper etiquette. Our society doesn't have a set of commandments but we do have things that are needed to be productive citizens. As Americans it is our constitutional right whether or not we obey those commandments, but it's important that we take them into consideration.

Euthanasia is the deliberate act of putting an end to a patient’s life for the purpose of ending the patients suffering. But can it ever be right to kill patients, even with the intent to ease suffering? To kill patients, even with the intent to ease suffering, is considered homicide. Over the past years euthanasia has been defeated and become illegal in every country besides Netherland and Belgium. I am afraid that if euthanasia could have been legalised in those two countries, it’s a matter of time; the whole world would approval and soon follows the Dutch’s example of ‘good and easy death.’ Once legalised, euthanasia will become a means of health care containment, will become involuntary and would not only apply for the terminally ill,

There have been organizations supporting the legalization of voluntary euthanasia in Britain and in the US for years now. They have had some public support but were unable to achieve the goal of legalizing voluntary euthanasia in either nation. In England a society, called “The Voluntary Euthanasia Society” was founded to make voluntary euthanasia legal for an adult that is suffering. The first group that was formed in the US that was for the legalization of euthanasia was the Hemlock Society. This societie’s purpose was to support the decision of a person to die and to offer support when a person is ready to die. The only way the society would support a person was if the person believed in euthanasia for a certain amount of time before requesting to die. “On May 5, 1998, the Voluntary Euthanasia Research Foundation announced its establishment. Its purpose is to make available up-to-date information on developments in technology and methods for those seeking voluntary euthanasia” (Fox 134).

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.

The topic of euthanasia has caused much controversy, It has been a subject of debate due to its seeming infringement of a person’s fundamental right to live. As a law, Euthanasia is legal in some countries, even in some parts of the United States. The topic of Euthanasia is a huge debate and a very researched subject in bioethics to this day. It is the right of any living human being to see the many benefits that the use of euthanasia provides. Euthanasia should be legally allowed in the United States because it interferes with the concept of ordered liberty, and ultimately makes death with dignity a real option.

Margaret P. Battin’s “Euthanasia: The Way We Do It, the Way They Do It” discusses the occurrence and practice of euthanasia and assisted suicide in three first-world, industrialized, developed nations: The Netherlands, Germany, and the United States. All three of these countries have one important factor in common that makes them ideal for studying euthanasia: aging populations who primarily die of degenerative diseases, rather than parasitic or infectious diseases (Battin 579). In the United States, outright euthanasia is illegal. Rather, the accepted form of

The debate on legalizing assisted suicide is an issue across the globe. It has brought countries to contemplate on the legalities of the matter in their respective legislative branches of government. Assisted suicide is just simply a matter of assessing one's will to perform such act with the permission of the subject or the patient in such way his will be done. The debate now focuses on either the act shall be legalized or not.

In current times we have made many technological advances that have boosted the medical productivity in hospitals. However, the rapid development of medicine is far from being a long term resolve for many health issues. We have a plethora of people whose quality of life is very low and has no chance of improving. During these situations allowing the person to end their life via euthanasia should be allowed. I will argue that Euthanasia is morally permissible in some cases because there are several moral justifications that argue for ending one’s life.

Euthanasia is the practice of ending an individual's life in order to relieve them from an incurable disease or unbearable suffering. The term euthanasia is derived from the Greek word for "good death" and originally referred to as “intentional killing” ( Patelarou, Vardavas, Fioraki, Alegakis, Dafermou, & Ntzilepi, 2009). Euthanasia is a controversial topic which has raised a great deal of debate globally. Although euthanasia has received great exposure in the professional media, there are some sticky points that lack clarity and need to be addressed. Euthanasia is a divisive topic, and different interpretations of its meaning, depend on whether the person supports it or not. While a few societies have accepted euthanasia, there are

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.