Taking a Look at 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.

The controversy of euthanasia and assisted suicide are moral issues, legal issues, and economical issues. People who are pro euthanasia believe that people should be able to die sooner rather than later to maintain their dignity. There are many aspects when determining when someone’s illness and suffering are prolonged. Pro euthanasians also believe that they should legally be able to determine time of death. Courts have varied opinions on the criteria for allowing euthanasia and assisted suicide, which can be relaxed with time. Medical professionals are also put in a circumstance to make a decision that is unwanted. Society argues that allowing people to determine time of death can affect someone’s financial obligation among other things.

The controversy of euthanasia is nothing new. Euthanasia can be voluntary, active, passive or involuntary; along with a combination of factors. Supporters of active euthanasia or when a person requests to end their life as a result of a terminal illness that is causing a terrible amount of pain advocate that those patients should have the right to choose their time of death. The opposers of active euthanasia argue that it is murder to remove life saving devices and one should

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,

Euthanasia has become a controversial subject. It is a Greek word, that means easy death, broken down into origins EU means "good" and Thanatos means death. Therefore, this word also means good death. Euthanasia's definition is the intentional termination of life by another at the explicit request of the person who dies. This implies that the act must be initiated by the person who wishes to commit suicide. (Euthanasia)

Euthanasia, the medical term for assisted suicide or mercy killing, is an issue still being debated almost a hundred years after a proposal to legalize it in Ohio. The medical community was in turmoil even before its legal proposition, unable to decide amongst themselves how to deal with the issue. The same arguments still rage today, though the public is more aware of the issue thanks to high-profile court cases, like the trial of Dr. Jack Kevorkian. Some claim that the terminally ill have a “right to die”, but no human life should end by unnatural means.

Euthanasia has been a moral issue since around the 5th century B.C. in Ancient Greece. However, it has only recently become a much more controversial and widespread issue. Euthanasia is defined as the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma. Today, many people disagree with euthanasia; however, even some who disagree with it still support an alternate form, called physician-assisted suicide or dying. Physician-assisted death is the voluntary administration of lethal drugs varying from pills, to injections, to breathing in toxic gas, all of which is painless. So, what’s the problem? Do we, or do we not have the right to die?

Euthanasia is largely contested and debated because many people in society deem it does not fit with their idea of how they should behave and believe (Botton, 2000). The main debate within the issue of euthanasia is that the individual is able to understand their own experiences (Mills, 1959) and they are capable to interpret the value of those experiences (Kymlicka, 2002) in a manner which constitutes them being able to make major decisions involving the future of their life. Unfortunately due to almost all of the individuals that wish to be euthanised having serious and terminal illnesses, they are not able to freely choose how they want to live their life, and are constantly being penalised by society (Kymlicka, 2002). Some people see the issue of euthanasia a public issue, in which the value of life is threatened for the community, many see it as a private trouble for the individual (Mills, 1959). Currently euthanasia is legal in only four countries while assisted suicide is legal in four more and five US states, while debate about the legalisation in other countries, such as Australia is non-existent. This gives a sense of marginalisation to those whose wish to practice euthanasia and their families, which in tern leads to a lack of involvement in society (Mills, 1959). The choice to end ones life

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

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.

Controversies on legalization of euthanasia in Europe and America are continuing. The argument for legalizing euthanasia36 is that the individual 's freedom entails liberty or choice in all matters as long as the rights of any other person are not infringed upon. The argument against legalizing euthanasia is that it will lead to disrespect for human life. Euthanasia can then be abused for criminal purposes. A financial motive is sometimes advanced in favor of euthanasia. It costs money to the family or the government to keep terminally ill people on life support which will be wastage of resources if they eventually die.

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.

Euthanasia  is from a Greek  word (εὐθανασία) meaning "good death" where εὖ, eu (well or good)  and  thanatos (death) refers to the practice of intentionally ending a life in order to be relieved from pain and suffering. Euthanasia is categorized in three different ways, which include voluntary euthanasia, non-voluntary euthanasia, or involuntary euthanasia. Voluntary euthanasia   is legal in some countries and U.S. states. Non-voluntary euthanasia  is illegal in all countries. However, in the Netherlands, physicians can avoid prosecution by following well described and strict conditions. These conditions include patient request, taking into consideration the amount of suffering the patient is experiencing, alternative courses

‘Right to life’ is a natural right embodied in Article 21 but suicide is an unnatural termination or extinction of life and, therefore, incompatible and inconsistent with the concept of ‘right to life’. It is the duty of the State to protect life and the physician’s duty to provide care and not to harm patients. If euthanasia is legalised, then there is a grave apprehension that the State may refuse to invest in health (working towards Right to life). Legalised euthanasia has led to a severe decline in the quality of care for terminally ill patients in Holland (Math and Chaturvedi 1).