Doctors Who Practice Euthanasia Should be Executed
- Length: 2109 words (6 double-spaced pages)
- Rating: Excellent
Doctors the Practice Euthanasia Should be Executed
An eighty-seven year old grandmother on a respirator, a newborn child
with AIDS, a teacher past her prime, and a father in a coma; all put to death by respectable doctors
with the O.K. of their families. But is it really a ggod thing? Euthanasia, or
doctor-assisted suicide, has become as common as jumping off of a fifteen
story building or taking a gun to one1s own head. Certainly society frowns
upon suicide, but yet putting an old lady or a man in a coma to death is
being accepted every day. Society knows that suicide is bad, but
euthanasia is even worse. The guilt and blame of a lost life is falling on
the hands of doctor1s that we are supposed to trust, and even worse, the
family members themselves. A doctor is to be known as a healer, not an
agent of death. A family is supposed to love and support, not kill and
inherit. Every person makes the light of the world brighter. The world
needs everyone1s power and contribution. It1s the power and energy of the
elderly, and the strength and will of the ill, that give the world life.
The light has become very dim with the crime and corruption in today1s
world, we can1t afford to throw lives away because some think they1re
meaningless. If we continue to accept the merciless killings and suicides
of the helpless but powerful, the light will soon burn out. There will be
no energy in the world. Euthanasia and doctor-assisted suicide should not
be accepted or allowed by the government and people of the United States.
Statistics show that seventy-three percent of the U.S. population
approved of some form of euthanasia. This is used constantly in debates to
pass laws for making euthanasia legal. But the people are deceived by this
number. When the poll was taken, the people were asked if they approved of
"some form" of euthanasia. There are two forms of euthanasia, active and
passive. It is the passive euthanasia that many people are accepting, the
less harsh of the two. That's why people generally say they approve of it.
If a separate question was asked or the people were informed of the
difference, we would find that only thirty-eight percent of the population
approves of active suicide, as used by Kavorkian. So the fact that people
approve of euthanasia is irrelevant because only thirty-eight percent would
actually pass a law if they knew that Kavorkian1s methods would be allowed.
However, it is said that passive euthanasia, suicide by the removal of
life support, is a long-time practice for hospitalized patients. But does
this make it O.K?I should think not. Many things have been accepted and
practiced in the world, and many of them have become illegal. Not too long
ago a teenager could drink whenever he wanted. Now we have laws to
regulate the drinking age. This is the same type of thing, something
terrible has going on for too long now. We need to put a stop to the
killings with a law. Just because something has been allowed and occurring
for a long time doesn1t mean that it1s O.K. Also, there is the issue of
living wills. A living will is a document that protects the right of
choice in end of life matters for patients. And not everyone has a living
will when they become ill even though they don1t want to live through the
agony and pain. They just don1t think to make one or plan on being ill
and incompetent. But with or without a living will, it1s just not right to
end a life, even if it1s one1s own. Many think that they should be able to
decide on their own, but what about their families. The family will spend
the rest of their lives wondering in agony and pain about whether or not a
cure would have been found or if the patient would have made it out of the
coma. It wouldn1t be right to spread the pain by adding to the fire. But
some say, 3Why waste the money and extend the pain and agony by keeping
someone on a machine?ý We need to look at life in a more positive way. We
need to weigh the matters evenly. What1s more important, the life of a
family member or trying to save money and pain. Clearly it is the life,
nothing is more important than that. Approximately one billion dollars is
spent on life support patients annually. But the cost of keeping people
alive is irrelevant if there is a chance that they may be cured or come out
of a coma.
More importantly, we need to look at the reasons why it1s used, not
just what people think about it. Life and death is a huge issue, a person
can1t afford to be pressured into a drastic decision about their life.
Whether it1s unconscious or not, doctors, family friends may pressure a
patient to choose death. We need to eliminate the option or we1ll always
have the issue of whether or not the patient was pressured into suicide.
That is certainly not right. It probably doesn1t make sense that family
members would actually pressure a loved one into suicide, but money is the
real issue. The doctors can make a lot of money and the families will save
on medical bills while inheriting a lot of money and belongings. Think
about the disabled, retarded, unassertive, poor, and even the elderly. All
very vulnerable to an influential person. Yes, even little Ool grandma.
Americans aged eighty-five and older is the largest category faced with
euthanasia. In 1950 there were over a half of a million Americans aged
eighty-five and older and by 1990 that number grew to 3.1 million. With
the medical technology we have and the progress we are making to improve
today, the number of Americans older than eighty-five will be more than
twice that of 1990 in the year 2005. We are spending millions of dollars
for medical technology to save lives, we shouldn1t let live be thrown away
when hard working citizens are paying taxes to help keep them alive.
Also, the reasons that euthanasia is used may just be flat out wrong.
Many times, a patient gives up their life because they feel like a burden
to their family. If this is so, what has the world come to when the people
that a patient has known, loved, and respected for so long, makes them feel
like a burden. A person is supposed to be able to go to their family for
support, that1s what a family is all about. Sticking together and getting
through problems the right way, not ending one1s life. Many times a
patient feels like a burden because of treatment costs. The cost of
treatment is way too high for many patients to afford, so they go to their
families. But rather than support and help, the patient gets resistance and
feels as though they have become a burden. This causes them to want to
turn to death, rather than trouble the one group of people that are
supposed to be there for help in times of need.
Furthermore, without passive euthanasia millions of lives can be saved.
A law has to be made to stop these 3mercy killingsý. There are thousands
of people that are seriously hospitalized with a terminal disease or a coma.
An estimated ten-thousand of these hospitalized patients die daily.
Seventy percent of these deaths are a direct result of 3secretlyý
withdrawing life support. Yes, everyday a number of patients die from a
family member paying a visit to them and 3pulling the plugý while the
doctor isn1t around. It1s bad enough that we have so many troubles with
general homicides and suicides, but now it1s time to concern ourselves with
the killings that are going on in hospitals. The institution that we go
to for good health, security, and treatment is doing just the opposite and
it needs to be stopped. If a law is passed that makes euthanasia illegal,
then people will definitely think twice before helping someone end their
life. There has to be price to pay for helping one commit suicide, it
should not be taken lightly. By passing a law against euthanasia,
thousand of lives will be saved.
Next is the issue of active euthanasia, actively taking measures to
help end the life of another. This is the type of euthanasia practiced by
Doctor Jack Kavorkian and argued about all over the world. Many important
issues surface when discussing active euthanasia. First, there is the
argument that a person has the right to choose. Each individual should be
able to make the decision of whether or not they want to live in pain or
die with dignity. Otherwise people are just like robots that are
controlled by laws, society and always have to do what others think is
right. But is giving up a life and committing suicide really dignified?
There is always the chance of coming out of a coma and finding a cure for a
disease. Thousands of doctors are working to find cures for every terminal
disease all over the world. When there1s the chance of being cured like
there always is, there is no reason to commit suicide. No matter how
anyone looks at it or says it, suicide is not dignified. Everyone has the
right to choose, but it the choices are how to lead and live their life,
not end it. And there is nothing robotic about following laws that are
made to protect the people and the society they live in. Choices about how
one1s life will end aren1t to be made by oneself, they can choose how to
lead their life but there is no dignity gained by committing suicide.
Secondly, just because something is considered to be sinful by the Bible
or in any other religion, doesn1t mean it should be a crime. We live in a
democracy where the people, of all religions, make the laws. They
shouldn't be based on any religion or religious book. But we1re not
talking about the sin of suicide, where talking about euthanasia.
Euthanasia is assisted suicide, but isn1t that just a nice name for
homicide. Suicide is killing oneself, but how can you assist yourself. The
assistant is another person who is guilty of conspiracy to commit murder.
Laws are already passed against murder. When someone takes part in
euthanasia they1re not going to be on trial for attempted suicide because
they weren1t trying to kill themselves, they were taking the life of
another. It1s murder and there1s no other way to look at it. Next is the
belief that active euthanasia should be tolerated in order to save agony
and pain for both the family and patient. No one should have to go through
so much agony over a long period of time.
Many think that it1s torture not to help dying patients. Kavorkian
accused opposing physicians of being "Nazi doctors" who torture and
experiment with the poor and unfortunate. However, what is the agony and
pain? It is the agony and pain of death and it has to be faced either way,
but it shouldn't be because of a suicide. We should face the pain and
agony with strength and determination. The patients need to be determined
to hang on and fight for cures. It1s not torture to keep someone alive in
hopes of a cure. And if a patient is that ill, then they aren1t really
going through that much physical pain, it1s the mental and emotional states
of patients that need to be secured. That1s the reason many turn to
suicide, they are unhappy with their lives so they begin to decline
mentally and emotionally. And as far as experimenting goes, no
experimental drug or procedure is forced upon any patient, including the
elderly and incompetent. And what do they have to lose anyway? Most don't
mind using experimental drugs because it just may be the cure they1re
looking for. There is nothing "Nazi" about testing drugs and cures in
hopes of saving a life. There is no torture or direct result of death. So,
in actuality there is no physical agony or pain saved in euthanasia because
that's not what the patients are going through. It just shortens the
mental and physical pain that can be helped in other ways than death.
Either way, suicide is no answer to pain.