On March 3rd 2014, the law was changed in Belgium to abolish all age restrictions on euthanasia. This amendment allows euthanasia for terminally ill children who are exposed to “constant and unbearable suffering” (1). The act was passed in the Belgian Parliament with 86 votes in favour, and 44 against (with 12 abstentions). This amends Belgium’s previous law, “The Belgian Act on Euthanasia”, which was passed in 2002 (2), whereby euthanasia was only available to individuals over the age of eighteen or emancipated minors. There are several arguments in favour of this amendment including the belief that the rights of autonomy and justice must extend to children. Furthermore, prolonging life where the child has a loss of dignity and a reduced quality of life is seen by some as inhumane. In contrast, opponents of the amendment believe that the child’s right to life and doctor’s obligation to save life are both severely undermined. Opponents are concerned that a child does not possess the capacity to make the decision to end their own life. There is also the worry that granting paediatric euthanasia may lead to a ‘slippery slope’ whereby children could be euthanized without making a fully voluntary request. Despite the fact that public opinion was broadly in favour of the amendment (3), the question must be asked, was the amendment of this law in favour of murder or mercy?
In order to understand this debate, the term euthanasia must be defined. Euthanasia is literally translated
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
David Chazan’s article discusses the case of the first minor to ever got euthanasia in Belgium. In his article, Chazan presents information about the actions that took place after euthanasia became legal without age restrictions in Belgium. In addition, Chazan explains the qualifications that a minors needs to fulfill in order to be consider as candidates for assisted suicide. Parental approval and near imminent death must be present to qualify for the procedure. In addition , the Belgium law request the minor to be in constant physical pain, demonstrate a persistent
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.
More than likely, a good majority of people have heard about euthanasia at least once in their existence. For those out there who have been living under a rock their entire lives, euthanasia “is generally understood to mean the bringing about of a good death – ‘mercy killing’, where one person, ‘A’, ends the life of another person, ‘B’, for the sake of ‘B’.” (Kuhse 294). There are people who believe this is a completely logical scenario that should be allowed, and there are others that oppose this view. For the purpose of this essay, I will be defending those who are for euthanasia. My thesis, just by looking at this issue from a logical standpoint, is that if someone is suffering, I believe they should be allowed the right to end their
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
In the debate over euthanasia, the opponent concludes that euthanasia should be illegal because it is goes against nature, dignity, personal-interests and has a practical effect. On the other side of the debate, the supporter concludes that euthanasia should be legal because moral principles, what it really mean to kill, end suffering, the difference between injury and not injury. In this essay I will conclude that euthanasia should be legal.
In the medical realm, any argument regarding euthanasia is an argument of ethics. After considering the argument, we must first define what active and passive euthanasia is. The definitional distinction between passive and euthanasia is one
According to the USCCB’s “Assisted Suicide: From Voluntary to Involuntary”, in 2014 in Belgium, restrictions to age limits were removed for euthanasia. This extended this so-called freedom to children of all ages. An infant that was only four days old was euthanized in 1993 for having the birth defect, spina bifida. The physicians proposed this euthanization and completed it with the parents’ consent (USCCB 2017). Aside from the fact that the whole practice of euthanasia is immoral, the infant was unable to consent to the procedure. In general, no procedure should be done without the consent of the patient, let alone, a procedure that promotes the death of the patient. If an arbitrary line is drawn, someone will try to cross it. Once the principle is put into place, it leads down a slippery slope. The case of The Netherlands is evidence that if allowed, doctors will cross the line and take the choice away from the
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
Euthanasia is one of the most controversial topics in modern society, and every human being has a different view on it according to their culture, their nation's
The legalization of euthanasia has always been a highly debatable topic since it causes philosophical, religious, moral and ethical controversy where some people believe it reduces our respect for the value of human life and it will be a gateway for other immoral actions to be normalized even though it is a basic human right that patients all over the world are denied to this day.
Having watched this fifty minute video on YouTube, I was shocked how drastically people believes and practices can vary from culture to culture. In Belgium, euthanasia has been legally practiced for over thirteen years, allowing its citizens, from children to elders, to choose between life and death. The scary part of this practice is that a patient himself or herself identifies a degree of suffering. In other words, in Belgium, it is up to a patient, not to a doctor or psychiatrist, to decide whether his or her pain is unbearable, which sound like absurd idea for modern American society. In this video, the perfectly healthy old lady decides that she does not want to live anymore due to the loss of
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
Euthanasia, which is also referred to as mercy killing, is the act of ending someone’s life either passively or actively, usually for the purpose of relieving pain and suffering. “All forms of euthanasia require an intention to accelerate death in order to benefit patients experiencing a poor quality of life” (Sayers, 2005). It is a highly controversial subject that often leaves a person with mixed emotions and beliefs. Opinions regarding this topic hinge on the health and mental state of the victim as well as method of death. It raises legal issues as well as the issue of morals and ethics. Euthanasia is divided into two different categories, passive euthanasia and active euthanasia. “There are unavoidable uncertainties in both active and