Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Euthanasia moral and ethical issues
The legal implications of euthanasia
The legal implications of euthanasia
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Euthanasia moral and ethical issues
Euthanasia, also known as assisted suicide, means to take a deliberate action with the express intention of ending a life to relieve intractable suffering. In the majority of countries, euthanasia is against the law because it is illegal to help someone kill themselves, not matter the severity of the circumstances. Euthanasia is simply unjustified. As humans we are granted the right to live, not to die, and so taking a life that you have been blessed with is not an honorable or appropriate option. If society accepts euthanasia, it will weaken society’s high view of life. Furthermore, if society allows euthanasia of a patient due to the economic considerations, do we not expect this same society to euthanize the mentally challenged and physically disabled. Euthanasia might just end up making society accept the notion that some lives are worth less than others; and that is unacceptable. It is argued that sometimes the motive behind euthanasia is “good” because it can end ones suffering. Nonetheless, euthanasia is not a good excuse to commit murder and take the life of an innocent human being, as there are other methods to help a person. Palliative care is a physical, emotional, and spiritual care for a dying person when a cure isn’t possible. It includes a compassion and support for family and friends and is a way of using specialized medical technique to relieve their pain and make the most out of their remaining life. The focus in palliative care is not to cure the illness, as it may not be at the moment, but just to let patients live in dignity and peace before their death. Health isn’t everything in life, especially without joy and love, and this is where palliative care comes into play. This, of course, needs to be emphasized ... ... middle of paper ... .... Palliative care also focuses on the life quality improvement of the patients, allowing them to recover the dignities of life before death. In all these cases, it is ruled out that any case of euthanasia is morally justifiable due to the aforementioned reason. However, when the patient himself shifts his interest from his own to others, especially the poor and needy, voluntary euthanasia will become sacrificial euthanasia, as viewed by others. In this case, euthanasia is neither akin to murder nor suicide. Instead it is a form of charity towards others, while abandoning one's own interest for the sake of others. This sacrifice holds a high view of the sanctity of life as it tries to help the life of others but is still not enough to push euthanasia into an acceptable mode. Euthanasia is taking the lead on a very dangerous road that society has decided to embark on.
In the context of euthanasia, helping someone end their suffering may be viewed as doing more good than harm. This is said to be in line with the moral view that no patient be allowed to suffer unbearably, out of compassion and mercy (Norval and Gwyther, 2003). However, it can be argued that a further step in beneficence is the “duty to prevent harm to others” (Pellegrino and Thomasma, 1987), which falls under the principle of non-maleficence. Thus appropriate and optimal palliative care should be the right approach instead of euthanasia. Euthanasia advocates also set forth an argument based on distributive justice to support active voluntary euthanasia. The “rule of rescue” questions whether it is ethical to engage in expensive treatment of terminally ill patients to prolong their lives for a short period when medical funding is limited and gradually decreasing (Gabriel, 2011). This preferential treatment compromises the objectives of the medical profession and is morally unacceptable. The terminally ill patients who are already vulnerable should not be left to feel that they are a burden. They should be treated equally and should not be seen as depriving someone else of a prior right to those resources. Finally, as Beauchamp and Childress note, “the most vital consideration which binds all the four principles together is the character of the doctor who has to treat and care for his patients”
Anyone can be diagnosed with a terminal illness. It doesn’t matter how healthy you are, who you are, or what you do. Some terminal illnesses you can prevent by avoiding unhealthy habits, eating healthily, exercising regularly and keeping up with vaccinations. However some terminally ill people cannot be helped, their diseases cannot be cured and the only thing possible to help them, besides providing pain relieving medication, is to make them as comfortable as possible while enduring their condition. Many times the pharmaceuticals do not provide the desired pain escape, and cause patients to seek immediate relief in methods such as euthanasia. Euthanasia is the practice of deliberately ending a life in order to alleviate pain and suffering, but is deemed controversial because many various religions believe that their creators are the only ones that should decide when their life’s journey should reach its end. Euthanasia is performed by medical doctors or physicians and is the administration of a fatal dose of a suitable drug to the patient on his or her express request. Although the majority of American states oppose euthanasia, the practice would result in more good as opposed to harm. The patient who is receiving the euthanizing medication would be able to proactively choose their pursuit of happiness, alleviate themselves from all of the built up pain and suffering, relieve the burden they may feel they are upon their family, and die with dignity, which is the most ethical option for vegetative state and terminally ill patients. Euthanasia should remain an alternative to living a slow and painful life for those who are terminally ill, in a vegetative state or would like to end their life with dignity. In addition, t...
Although euthanasia requests have begun to stabilize throughout the years while palliative care has improved, euthanasia will never completely disappear. This topic depends on the type of person someone is and what thethat person is enduring. Many people fear the process of dying and the dying itself. Even though there are treatments to relieve some pain throughin the process, a patient still knows death will eventually come. Some might believe it is better to end it now rather than prolonging it. Improving palliative care will not get rid of euthanasia requests, but instead, prolong the requests. A person’s suffering can only be temporarily managed. Even if a patient is on a pain relieving treatment, there might be other side effects that cause the patient to suffer, such as nausea and vomiting. Some may like the idea of temporarily removing the suffering, but others may not because of the realization of needing a treatment to temporarily make himself feel better. These treatments can be very costly and, over time, can add up to a great amount of money that a patient and his family does not have. Also, those who are on palliative care may decide later on that the wait or the side effects are not worth it anymore and eventually request euthanasia. The improvements of palliative care will only prolong the requests of
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.
Voluntary euthanasia is defined as the act of killing someone painlessly, especially to relieve suffering from an incurable illness, with their consent (Collins English Dictionary, 2013). The morality and legal aspect of voluntary euthanasia has been a debate for many years. Voluntary euthanasia is a significant ethical dilemma that impacts nursing practice and other professionals in the healthcare field. With the utilization of ethical principles and theories, voluntary euthanasia can be deemed appropriate in some situations, but still can be a moral dilemma to those involved. This paper will discuss four people’s opinions about euthanasia that come from four different backgrounds as well as the group’s opinion about euthanasia.
“When a patient says, ‘Help me doctor,’ he is assuming that his doctor is on the side of his life.” This quote by Dr.Margaret Cottle , who is a palliative care physician , shows the mentality that most patients have when it comes to patient care. Euthanasia is a very controversial topic that has been debated on throughout the years. Whether it may be active euthanasia, passive euthanasia, voluntary euthanasia, involuntary euthanasia, indirect or physician assisted the morals and reasoning behind each are controversial. Though some people may believe euthanasia may be justified in a critical situation and critical punishment, euthanasia should be prohibited because euthanasia weakens societies respects for the sanctity of life, euthanasia might not be in the person’s best interest, and euthanasia affects other peoples rights, not just the patients.
Mercy killing, also known as euthanasia or assisted suicide, is the end of life of an extremely incapacitated individual’s existence so as to calm them of their agony. Anyone who experiences it generally has a hopeless condition. Such as someone with a terminal ill disease that is not curable. For example, a patient with Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or metastasize cancer in its final stage. Be that as it may, there are different occurrences where few individuals need their life to be finished. This process is solely based on the individual’s request and some cases carried out by relatives, specialist or in a couple of cases, the courts. “The moral concern of willful euthanasia is tied into the centrality of life, reason behind accommodating treatment and the patient capability to pick when treatment or life ought to end” (Baillie et al., 2013 p 168). Therefore, addressing the decisions and concerns behind euthanasia is a debatable topic that requires a continuous analysis of this issue.
An argument can be made against the use of euthanasia too as it relates to patients who are terminally ill. With the advance of technology and the changes that follow in the way we care for patients we have also found other means of making a patient more comfortable when faced with illnesses like cancer. While it would be easier on the patient and the families by having them make their exit from this life a little easier by way of euthanasia, palliative care is also an option for the preservation of life. Palliative care is a form of spe...
For many years the topic of euthanasia caused a mixed reaction in society and it still does. Attention to the issue of euthanasia has increased with the development of social progress, and in particular with the technology to sustain seriously ill people. Relevance of this topic is difficult to overestimate, first, because it is associated with the most expensive a person has - his life, and secondly - because of poor knowledge of the euthanasia problem, lack of underlining it in the writings of scholars-lawyers. Doctors, psychologists, lawyers, religious figures and politicians constantly lead numerous debates upon this issue. However, euthanasia’s practice still has not found a clear common answer to the question of its justification.
Presently, many cases of euthanasia had occurred around the world. Many a time we will stop and ask whether the person has anymore hope to live as a normal person. At the end it is left to the court to decide whether the people live or die. But why does the patient or the guardian choose euthanasia when they can live a longer time with their loved ones. Some might ask whether it is worth to see your loved ones suffering, wouldn’t it be better to end the suffering? To answer this question we must know what euthanasia means. According to Fergusson(1992) euthanasia which comes from the Greek word ‘eu-thanatos’ which means “well death” or “good death”(Fergusson, A. 1992). Besides that according to the oxford dictionary sixth edition (1986) the definition of euthanasia is to” bring about gentle death especially in the case of incurable and painful disease”. According to the Journal of the Americans Medical Association (as cited in BBC,n.d) there are more than one way of defining good death(BBC,n.d). This means that good death is define according to one personal view of euthanasia or when he is in a situation that is critical to his health. Some people want to die a death that involves less pain. According to BBC(n.d) voluntary euthanasia happens when voluntary death is define as the request for mercy killing is done (BBC,n.d). According to BBC(n.d) non-voluntary euthanasia happens when the patient is unconscious(BBC,n.d).
The act of euthanasia may be justifiable, in that it gives those in pain an escape from their lives, however, it places a lot of power in the patient’s healthcare provider. Medical professionals are more pessimistic in patients’ diagnosis and rate their live value lower than it actually is (Pawlick and DiLascio 2). The negative diagnosis of these medical practitioners makes the patient feel especially drawn to euthanasia as a solution for the problem they may possess. Furthermore, the legalization of euthanasia would “cause society to devalue all life,” in that it makes everyone, not just patients, feel that euthanizing those who have medical issues is a better way to fix problems within our society, rather than treating them (Wekesser 64). Those against legalization say that the open availability for someone to end their life could lead to people feeling “more driven toward, or even forced” to be euthanized due to their emotional, rather than physical, pain (Lee and Stingl 1). During times of hardship such as a terminal illness, one often feels that their life is decreasing in value under the circumstances of the effective suffering their situation causes to the family and loves ones around them. It is therefore easier to end their life in a way that puts ease on the family and loved ones, in a
Care for patients in their last days, especially people with terminal illnesses poses ethical challenges to physicians and other healthcare providers. Today, Euthanasia remains ethical issue as proponents and opponents of this act offer their arguments in almost equal measure. Euthanasia is the action of intentionally ending one’s life in order to relieve them of pain and misery, and since there are various laws governing this practice in different countries, it is apparent many countries consider Euthanasia an ethical practice today (Have & Welie, 2005).
Euthanasia, according to the dictionary, means the killing of a person who is suffering from an incurable disease. Lately, it had been a huge debate over whether euthanasia should be legalized or not. Personally, I believe that euthanasia should be legalized if it is voluntary. I have three reasons for my argument.
If the palliative and hospice care were good enough and available to everyone in need of it, thoughts of euthanasia in terminally ill patients would be nearly nonexistent. It is best for a patient and his or her family or friends to be with each other until the end. With enough support from everyone, no matter how much pain, the patient should be set for the rest of his or her life. Palliative care also follows most religions, which means that there would be no reason for anyone to turn it down. If any important steps are taken to help out with the world’s euthanasia problem, palliative care should be one of the first plans put into
We live an ever-changing society that should not view Euthanasia as an unethical action, but as a way of help for suffering patients. Everyday their are thousands of hard working individuals that are diagnosed with a terminal illness and are now faced with decisions that must both be in the best interest for them and their families. This is neither an easy choice nor one that should be made without serious thought, but it should not be denied or penalized by society or government. It is a choice that must be made only by the patient in question with the input and understanding of their families. Many members of our society have worked very hard throughout their lives and if it is their desire to elect Euthanasia to spare them of the pain and the financial burden that a fatal illness would leave behind, then so be it.