Yoruba Tribe Euthanasia

However, there is immense criticism on the morality of the process, especially because the process denies a patient the right to natural death. The critics of the assisted suicide procedure argue that such a process devalues human life and tends to promote suicide as an alternative to personal suffering. By claiming that the procedure allows terminally ill patients to initiate dignity at death is flawed because the purpose of medical profession is to ensure a dignified life. According to the physicians’ code of ethics and the Hippocratic Oath, physicians are not allowed to do harm to their patients because their role is to allow a dignified health for members of the community. Consequently, legalization of Physician Assisted suicide that requires physicians to assist the patients to die is against their medical ethics. Quill, Cassel, & Meier (2010) provide that although the patients voluntarily ask the medical practitioners to assist in the process, the practitioners have a role to advise the patients against such a procedure. Besides, such a premise is bound to raise awareness of suicide as an alternative to suffering within the public domain, which may encourage such behavior among healthy members of the community that feel that they enjoy the freedom to make such a decision. On this basis, the negative moral implication of assisted suicide makes its legalization unworthy in the

After patients have been suffering for so long, it only seems right to allow them a peaceful death surrounded by family or, truthfully, however they see fit for their last days. If assisted suicide is legalized, patients will be able to control the assets and precedences of their own deaths. This will let them go peacefully and with bravery knowing they stuck out their fight but still got to die before their suffering was truly unbearable. In the article "Counterpoint: Assisted Suicide is a Civil Right", Issitt and Newton explain, "First and most importantly, it would allow each person the freedom to control the time, place, and circumstances of his or her death. Patients facing the slow progression of a fatal disease or the prognosis of living for years with incurable pain would be able to end their lives with dignity before their suffering became unbearable" (Issitt and Newton 4). In other words, patients should have the ability to control where they are and how they finally die, and assisted suicide can allow them to do just that. It is only right for a patient to have a peaceful death before the pain is too much to handle. With assisted suicide being legalized, patients and their families can make the patient's last few days dignified, celebratory, and comforting as they have struggled for so long. The same article also states, “In this article about assisted suicide, Issitt and Newton state, "In some cases, having the right to die might allow patients to make more informed choices about their health care. A patient might choose to postpone suicide in favor of alternative treatment options comforted by the knowledge that, if the pain becomes too unbearable, suicide would be an ultimate option to escape their suffering" (Issitt and Newton 4). Essentially, a patient being able to control their death is comforting and beneficial.

Physician-assisted suicide is arguably one of the most controversial subjects to discuss or read about within our society. This paper will examine both sides of this discussion, from the aspect of the patient choosing to end their own life based on the quality of their remaining life. Also, the religious factors of the medical staff involved and the moral and ethical duty of the doctors to preserve the life of the patient if there are still means available.

When a patient is terminally ill or is experiencing extreme pain, often Euthanasia or Assisted Suicide can both be plausible options to end any suffering. Euthanasia is currently legalized in seven countries and parts of the United States (New Health Guide). This number is not likely to increase soon because of the high controversy, which is due to the very serious topic of this matter: a person 's life. The general process of these medical methods is usually understood as a doctor somehow deliberately causing the death of a patient or helping with their suicide. Many believe that it is unethical and violates laws, oaths, and more. Though people believe this, it is truly unethical to not give a person a choice in the manner in which they will perish.

People, are incensed because in Muslim beliefs one is not allowed to commit suicide, which also applies to Christianity. (Source I). Several Journalists have also stated against euthanasia because they believe that life is truthfully sanctified and that “God” created life, so one cannot choose to die. (Source A). The Hippocratic oath as well specifically reads that doctors or physicians are not sanctioned to kill patients. (Source M). Even though many people are against euthanasia the citizens still want options for the end of their own life. (Source C). If the alternatives are inadequate and regulated the agony of the patients does not go away; numerous places have already legalized euthanasia, such as the Netherlands in 2002 being the first. Similarly, Japan’s Shintoists believe that people and patients should be sanctioned to die if they request for it. (Source C). In the Netherlands, 85 percent of the doctors will and can also consider facilitating patients and people in death. (Source B). Even though the Hippocratic oath states that doctors are not to kill their patients, there are two main forms of euthanasia- passive and active. (Source C). The two central forms of euthanasia do not go against regulations because subsequently those doctors have to be in accordance with the patients and people. (Source C).

Patients suffering from terminal illnesses, battle feeling worthless and hopeless on a daily basis. This is due to our jurisdiction forcing them to live. The number of people suffering continues to increase. Although a doctor’s position is to prolong life, euthanasia should be considered in certain cases. Because of the advances in technology euthanasia and physician assisted suicide are now an option for terminally ill patients who are going to suffer from an incurable and painful disease or are in an irreversible coma. Euthanasia and physician assisted suicide should be legalized because the public supports it, it would only be used for patients who are terminally ill, and it alleviates unnecessary suffering. The word euthanasia originates

Obviously, the proponents and opponents of legalizing euthanasia/assisted-suicide are fighting for what they believe is right. On the side of the proponents, they believe that patient’s should have the freedom to end their own life if they choose. They believe in the right-to-die and that everyone should have the ability to choose what they do with their own body. Contrasting this viewpoint, the

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

According to Linda Jackson in Euthanasia, a total of 42 people in Oregon had passed away due to physician-assisted suicide. This fact proves the efficiency of euthanasia to be successful in helping to relieve the terminally ill of their excruciating pain. Additionally, suicide is in fact legal in the states within Australia, so there are a vast amount of states that do allow suicide, however, they do not allow assisted suicide, which are very similar. Many states have opposed to euthanasia due to religious issues and the argument that euthanasia goes against the doctor’s oath to swear to do their best for the patient and commit no harm (Jackson 5). In contrast, euthanasia is not the only operation that would go against what is known as the Hippocratic Oath because in the original Oath, it also had prohibited abortions, surgery, and charging teaching fees, in which, in certain situations, are all allowed today. Being so, the argument stating that doctors are going against the Oath all because of euthanasia is invalid (Jackson 31). Christian attitudes and other major religions of the world pose a problem as well due to the issue of suicide being considered as a sin.

With the advances in medicine, physicians have the ability to extend a patient’s life many years passed what was possible even a mere fifty years ago. However, the quality of life of those extended years has become a major topic of discussion. Many times the surviving years are miserable for the patient, as well as the family. Legalizing assisted suicide would benefit Medicare by bringing it out of huge debt. Also, it would relieve the pain of terminal patients and open a door of opportunity for patients on the transplant list waiting for an organ. Because of all humans eventually die, every person should have the right to live a pain-free life. Although some religions are opposed to it, assisted suicide should be legal in all of the United States to the terminally ill.

The right to assisted suicide is a controversial topic in healthcare in the United States. The debate goes back and forth about whether a dying competent patient has the right to die with the help of a physician. There is an abundant amount of people in the United States are against it because of religious beliefs. Some individuals believe that it is not morally right for a physician to assist in a patient’s death because it is not respecting the dying patient. Physician-patient assisted suicide divide physicians because many physicians differ when it comes to separating voluntarily killing a patient or killing the patient to respect their dying wish. Patients, who are gravely ill or in their final stages of life, often request for doctors to help them pass on by requesting medications such as morphine to help speed up their death because they are in pain. In healthcare, medical technology has come a long way to help lengthen a person’s life span. If a patient is actively dying from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), there are respiratory machines to aid in giving that patient oxygen to breath in more air which one could not achieve if the respiratory machine was not available to them. Medicine is intended to prevent diseases or allay the pain and suffering that a patient endures while going through medical treatments. Patients that are terminally ill should have the right to assisted suicide by a physician because it

Only God should choose when a human life ends, so committing an act of euthanasia or assisting in suicide is acting against the will of God and is sinful. Many members of the Christian, Jewish and Islamic faiths share this belief. The issue is more complex in Hinduism and Buddhism. Academics from both faiths have argued that euthanasia and assisted suicide are ethically acceptable acts in some circumstances, but these views do not have universal support among Hindus and Buddhists. Some non-religious people may also have similar beliefs based on the view that permitting euthanasia and assisted suicide devalues life.

Some states have chosen to hasten death. Oregon, Washington, and California have legalized assisted suicide. The moral case against assisted suicide centers on our right to choose on the basic goodness of human persons such as life and health, knowledge, friendship, and others. Doctors and families should provide to help patients attain and preserve these gift. The choice to kill a human is contrary to the love and appreciation for that person and the Hippocratic Oath. Since these are aspects of a person, the action against any of them is to act against a person. In the case of assisted suicide, someone must play the role of God. People taking on

Moreover, euthanasia is restricted by the church. This is another important point that we should consider, especially for religious people. According to “Death and Dignity” it is emphasized that “Life is a gift from God and it is only God who can take it back”. Christian’s point of view considers euthanasia as a crime against church, religion and God. Christians consider this as an immoral act. When considering the religious factor as well, we can conclude that no one has the right to take control over our lives, especially when we are unconscious.

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.