The Issue Of Active Killing

Who dictates how you live your life? How does one define life and when that life should end? If you become terminally ill, would you like the choice to choose how your life ends? In the United States, assisted suicide, is a highly-debated issue. On one side, there are many in support of allowing a person the right to end their life with dignity at the time of their choosing. While others believe, it is a moral right to sustain life and leave a person’s exit from this world to a higher power. The two opposing viewpoints have both compassionate reasons and disadvantages; nevertheless, a person’s human rights as an individual are the most important aspect to uphold.

Physician-assisted suicide (PAS) is the voluntary choice to end one’s life through self-administering a lethal substance with the assistance of a physician, either directly or indirectly. The concept of physician-assisted suicide roots back in history during the early ancient Greek and Roman times, before the coming of Christianity, where they actually tolerated infanticide, euthanasia, and suicide (Dowbiggin, 2003, p. 2). Throughout the classical period, many people supported voluntary death because for them it was better than having to live with terminal pain, and physicians often honored their patients’ requests (Dowbiggin, 2003, p. 2). Of course, they didn’t have the medical advances that we do now so, at the time, it seemed like a reasonable

People make decisions every single day of their lives. Although, people with a terminal diagnosis still have the capability to make decisions, they are not given the legal right to a physician assisted suicide. A choice some may desire in their final days. Once the person with the terminal diagnosis has met the specific criteria he or she should decide what would be optimal decision for both themselves and their families. Palliative care will always be available to terminal patients; however, not all patients will wish to wait and wonder. Nevertheless, some terminal patients will wish to take death into their own hands. People should be allowed to choose how they will die this would reduce the overall healthcare cost, decrease the emotional toll of the patients and their families, and allow there to be dignity within death.

It is unpleasant feelings or emotions that develop when untreated. The patient may feel depressed from all the suffering he or she has gone through with their families and friends. Depression can lead to many things when making the decision to proceed with assisted suicide. By requesting their desired need in assisted suicide may help ease their suffering and while spending time with their loved ones, families, and friends before they die. An article by Ezekiel Emanuel states, "Dutch researchers followed 138 terminally ill cancer patients and found that depressed patients were four times more likely to request euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide. Nearly half of those who requested euthanasia were depressed." Depression has become high doses of medication that causes the patient to review on the option to suffer more or die. The people who requested euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide were suffering from depression and they should be given what they want rather than denying. It is their natural rights as human beings to make the decision to proceed with assisted suicide if he or she desires it to end

Others argue that is a patient could simply commit suicide. However, in some situations, patients become so weak or debilitated they literally are unable to kill themselves. Those that are still strong enough to follow through on that act could be put off by the messy, undignified, or painful act. Failure to overdose property could leave a person in a vegetative state and jumping off a bridge could cause considerable trauma to others. With the assistance of a caring, competent doctor, people can arrange to die at a chosen time, in privacy and with

Euthanasia, also appropriately called ‘Mercy Killing’, when used appropriately can be the best option for a terminally ill patient, their families and for the doctor who administers the lethal overdose. But some individuals have taken it upon themselves to overlook the act of humanity and mercy aimed to preserve the dignity and comfort of the terminally, and instead, force these poor people endure Hell on Earth every prolonged, painful and pitiful day.

Is it right or wrong for someone to pick how and when somebody dies? Should that person or the family be able to choose? In a recent survey performed by the Pew Research Center, they asked if the people approve or disapproved of laws that allow doctor-assisted suicide. The results stated that forty-nine percent of people disapproved of the laws and forty-seven percent approved (Schadenberg, para. 3). If a patient is terminally ill, he or she should have the right to choose between life and death.

As we are not meant to live forever when it gets to a point where our lives become difficult to live due to old age or severe medical conditions, and incurable illnesses then people have a right to end their lives as they see fit. It is morally wrong to keep someone alive simply because other people believe it would be wrong to help them through active euthanasia. Believing that patients can refuse medical treatment and wait to die naturally is wrong as well as each individual has different reason for wanting to end their life. Fearing death only prolongs life a little longer but death comes to all and the moment we realize that death is a natural part of life and some just want to fasten the inevitable instead of prolonging life as some in

According to Webster’s dictionary the term euthanasia Is defined as, “ the act or practice of killing someone who is very sick or injured in order to prevent any more suffering.” Now then there are two primary types of euthanasia according to Rachel’s. We have Passive Euthanasia in which the physician does nothing to bring about the death of the patient. By this physician doing nothing, ceasing treatment, the patient dies of the illness he already was diagnosed with. The patient dies of natural causes. The doctor is therefore letting the patient die. Then we have Active Euthanasia were the physician does something to bring about the death of the patient. The physician gives the terminally ill patient a lethal injection therefore now making the doctor the

This usually stems from severe depression i.e. being a burden to family, life not worth living etc. While most patients acknowledge that they will die soon, only a number of them have a serious desire to die. Those who seriously want to die are the ones with severe depression. They are either in serious pain or have little to no family support.

A person has the right to choose when and how to desire a voluntary Euthanasia request (Mills). If only the patient has the capacity and the ability to use and understand the procedure of making a decision this serious. And only if that specific patient is suffering from an incurable disease or terminal illness. Depending on the circumstances the patient who is suffering should always have an individual by their side to help and advice throughout the procedure. Some request they are not physically harming others. On the other hand others believe it's a crime to take action. A person can make the decision whether to take drugs, injections, take a peaceful pill, or even starve to death. Try to put yourself in a position where you have an incurable illness. Would you keep fighting for what you have present your family or would you commit the procedure of Euthanasia? Only you would know what you're going through and know what pain can really be. It all depends on the

In the American Medical Association’s conventional doctrine, it is stated that aggressive euthanasia is always forbidden. Doctors can withhold treatment in many circumstances, with no repercussions by merely letting the patient die, but the doctor may never “kill” the patient. Intentional termination of life of one human being by another”, is termed mercy killing, and is wrong. Directly acting as the agent to kill a terminally ill patient or merely withholding treatment is mercy killing. If there is irrefutable evidence of the patient’s imminent death, than immediate family and the patient can decide on withholding treatment. There is human involvement regardless of omission to let die or kill someone.

“The painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma.” This is the definition of euthanasia provided by the Oxford English dictionary, but euthanasia is an issue encompassing much more controversy than just whether killing is right or wrong. Euthanasia can be voluntary or non voluntary yet it can also be active and passive, I will be arguing whether or not there is a distinction between these two and if so whether that distinction is morally significant.

Death has always been a controversial topic throughout the world. There are many theories as to where we go and what the meaning of life truly is. How one dies is important in today’s society, especially when it comes to the idea of suicide. Active euthanasia, also referred to as assisted suicide, is the intentional act of causing the death of a patient experiencing great suffering. It is illegal in some places, like France, but allowing patients to die is authorized by law in other places under certain conditions. Doug McManaman constructed an argument, “Active Euthanasia Is Never Morally Justified,” to defend his view that active euthanasia is never morally

not give them the right to stop those who do so. The reason for this is mainly because those who carry out euthanasia may have reasonable excuses such as, financial problems in maintaining hospital fees, psychological problems in watching beloved ones suffer, or even the patient might want to administer euthanasia in order to end his or her suffering. Hence, it can be seen that although some might think that having certain knowledge brings