Why Is Euthanasia Ethically Wrong

Physician assisted suicide is the termination of a life by the administration of lethal substances with the help of a doctor or physician. The legality and morality of physician assisted suicide is in a constant debate. Some claim that it is merciful to the terminally ill. Others claim that it is no better than murder. Despite its advocates, physician assisted suicide is morally and ethically wrong and impractical therefore it should remain illegal in the United States.

Euthanasia is a controversial topic regarding whether or not physician-assisted suicide should be further legalized. Euthanasia is the act of a medical doctor injecting a poison into a patient 's body in order to kill them. Some argue that euthanasia should be legalized to put people out of pain and misery. However, others argue that some people with terminal illnesses would do anything to live longer and believe that it is a selfish and cowardly act. Euthanasia is disputable because of the various ethical issues, including, but not limited to: murder and suicide illegality, the Hippocratic Oath, and medical alternatives. As someone who has had many traumatic experiences and who wants to become a doctor, I am very passionate about the well-being of my future patients and the responsibility to do no harm to them. For these lawful, logical, and personal reasons, euthanasia should not be legalized.

Euthanasia, or physician assisted suicide, is an important and controversial topic in our society today, and (under the correct conditions) should both be considered legal and morally acceptable. In fact, throughout history euthanasia has been a debate in many countries, some areas accepting the practice, whereas others find it unacceptable. Many people and professionals continue to refer to the Hippocratic Oath, an vow stating the proper conduct for doctors, and it's famous words "Do no harm." However, when it comes down to whatever holds people back, whether it is their views on religion or oaths from many years ago, it should be considered a correct practice. In fact, in the case of Vacco v. Quill, one point raised was that "Over time, the Hippocratic Oath has been changed, and deleted. In order to "do-no-harm" one would end suffering instead of prolonging it." With the use of Supreme Court cases, and professional psychologist and medical quotations, one can see the clear reasons that this topic must be allowed. In the end, euthanasia should definitely be considered correct both legally and morally due to one's legal rights, sensible ethical values, and the multiple positive benefits upon the legalization of euthanasia.

It’s one’s right to decide what happens to their body. Deciding one wants to end their life because they’re terminally ill and in pain should be permissible. It's no worse than a cancer patient refusing treatment, or a person being taken off life support. In fact, it might be better for people to be able to access physician assisted suicide as those suffering with chronic pain and no hope for a better future will be able to choose to die painlessly and with much more dignity. When the government refuses patient’s physician assisted suicide, people do at times decide to take matters into their own hands and attempt to end their own lives. This can go wrong and cause the patient to be in even more pain. This only includes those who are mobile enough to attempt suicide as well. The law against physician assisted suicide can also drive loved ones to end the patient’s suffering: so they no longer have to see them live in agony and misery. This causes many issues as the loved one may go to jail, or deal with psychological guilt for the rest of their lives. It seems better to allow people the ability to access physician assisted suicide as it’s no different than when one refuses treatment which is only prolonging

Evidence of physician-assisted suicide can be traced back to ancient times, especially to ancient Greece or Rome . In fact, the term “euthanasia” comes from the Greek term “a good death” . This controversy has carried over into the modern era, and much of the world is still fragmented over this specific issue; particularly, the United States proves to be split nearly 50-50 on the topic. A poll taken in the United States in 2011 shows that Americans skew slightly toward thinking that physician-assisted suicide is morally wrong, with 48% of Americans thinking it is morally wrong and 45% of Americans thinking it is morally acceptable . However, by changing the phrasing of the question and asking if an individual has a right to end his or her own

According to the New York Times article some of the main reason that someone would go through a decision of assisted suicide is to have control over how he or she dies. Being able to still have some control over there life and able to make that decision before they lose any type of brain function or become comatose and connected to a ventilator, which will only be prolonging the unavoidable. People are looking for choices, why’ll there are still capable of doing decision for themselves, they don’t want to see themselves connected to a machine or go through the pain and suffering of having their love ones watch as the clocks ticks away at their life not knowing when death will come. However, by them being in control over how they die and when it

There are several reasons why physician-assisted suicide is such an ongoing argument between people in this day and age. Whether they want it legalized or don’t want anything to do with it, it’s safe to assume that this topic is rather controversial in our society. In the debate titled “Doctor-Assisted Suicide Is Unethical and Dangerous” written by Ira Byock at the New York Times, he states, “Legalizing assisted suicide fixes nothing. The principle that doctors must not kill patients stands. Two moral wrongs don’t make a right” (Byock, 2015). Some may agree with Byock, but others truly believe that the patient should be able to make a choice about their end-of-life treatment and no one else should be able to tell them otherwise.

Physician assisted suicide refers to the voluntary termination of the life of a particular patient. It is conducted through administering a lethal substance with direct or indirect assistance from the physician. The case of physician-assisted suicide has caused many debates. Some doctors argue that it is unethical to participate in patient assisted suicide since it violates the fundamental principles of medical practice. It violates the Hippocratic Oath of doctors. This oath states that doctors should always act in the best interest of their patients. It implies that doctors should do everything possible to help their patients recover (Carr, 2010). It shows that participating in physician-assisted suicide is a wrongful act in this case. Some people also do not support physician-assisted suicide since they argue that it violates the principles that Christians adhere to. According to Catholic teachings, it is wrong to violate the commandment of Thou shall not kill (Carr, 2010). It shows that people should not participate in physician-assisted suicide since it is unethical. However, some people argue that it is ethical to practice physician-assisted suicide. It should be performed to patients who may be

Some feel that physician assisted death is unethical as medical doctors take the Hippocratic Oath which states, “I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody if asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect” (MedicineNet). The Hippocratic Oath has been used for a long time and has not evolved in the way that medicine, technology or society has. The Hippocratic Oath also states, “First do no harm” (MedicineNet). When medical doctors oversee assisted deaths they are not harming the patient. They are overseeing the patient in one of the scariest, dramatic, or peaceful times in their life. They are

Euthanasia and doctor assisted suicide, what a touchy subject. There is millions of people would say that it would be absolutely cruel to allow people in the medical field to have this “power”. As well just as many people are arguing that not allowing euthanasia or the assistance of a doctor to end a life is a violation of their rights. The right to “Life” has and will always be the number one most argued point when it comes to this topic. Many argue that it is that person’s life and if suffering from horrifying pain, should be able to

The oppositions to legalizing physician assisted suicide include several viewpoints of concern. The main and most prominent point is that legalizing physician-assisted suicide is morally unjust. According to the article “Physician Assisted Suicide is Always Wrong" author Ryan Anderson states, “Doctors may help their patients to die a dignified death from natural causes, but they should not kill their patients or help them to kill themselves “(2). This quote exemplifies the opposing side and central point of physician assisted suicide – Anderson displaying a moral opinion. Sworn by every physician is the oath “I will not give a lethal drug to anyone if I am asked, nor will I advise such a plan.” Therefore, another argument of the opposing party is the physician’s oath of “Do No Harm” would be hypocritical if physician-assisted suicide were to be made legal. Other arguments include lack of control over who is receiving the lethal medication, potential physician abuse of power, endangerment of the weak and vulnerable, and relationship compromising. In the article, “Pain

Religion plays an important role in the issue of physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia. Most of the major world religions are against suicide in all forms, even in the cases of pain and suffering. The Bible says, "Thou shall not kill." This was meant for everyone, not just for specific people. Doctors have the power to save people who are sick and at the end of their lives. They work hard to help people, not kill people. If physicians tell a family there is absolutely no chance for a patient to survive, the family will most likely believe them.

One perspective that many people, including the people performing the actions in some cases, is that killing someone is not an action that doctors are obligated to take. Many doctors acknowledge that it is now legal in some places, but they find it wrong or hypocritical to perform actions against the morals that made them become a doctor in the first place. (Karlamanga 1). Many doctors are practicing their job in areas that assisted suicide is legal, but that does not mean they are obligated to participate in this certain act, for it is a personal choice. Imagine being in the doctors shoes, they want to help people, ot end their life. A more common belief would be that assisted suicide is against religion. Ewan Goligher, a Christian doctor who works in the intensive care unit at Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto finds that the patient is worth more than their preference. (Fine 1). As said before, doctors have a huge reason to be against this movement, along with people belonging to religions of positive moral values. One who is a part of both speaks out on his opinion, that has potential to be shared by many. This opinion shows that people who are from a viewing perspective have a greater caring for how long the person is with them, rather than how they leave them. Last, but not least, looking at statistics one can see that the action of assisted

The controversy of a doctor assisting their patient who is already dying, end their life sooner to save them from continuous unnecessary pain and agony has been the topic of controversy for years. The practice of euthanasia is in my opinion a mercy and should not be banned because in reality it doesn’t physically hurt anyone. You could say it hurts the patient but then again that patient is already in tremendous pain or in an incapacitated state of no recovery, as in paralyzed or brain damage etc., so in reality it would actually help them by assisting ending their pain by assisted suicide. A doctors job is also always help their patients and the practice of assisted suicide in many ways is actually helping the person. However there has and probably always will be people who do not agree with the idea of a dying person end their life for sooner than nature had intended. This demographic would suggest that by dying by your own hand or assisted by a physician for medical reasons is still considered plain suicide. And for the religious people it is a sin by their beliefs. The people could also argue that it is not a person’s right to make that decision.

Euthanasia is a controversial issue. Many people believe that doctors should not prescribe any medication that ends a person’s life since it is considered to be against the Hippocratic Oath. The Hippocratic Oath states that doctors are professionally obliged to save lives. Some consider euthanasia to be immoral and others say that it is murder. Euthanasia should