The word euthanasia is derived from Greek language where 'eu’ meaning good and 'thanasia’ meaning death. Euthanasia is also known as the practice of intentionally ending a life of person who is either suffering from an incurable disease or is in immense pain. In other words euthanasia is physician assisted dying (PAS). The influence of scientific and medical discoveries in the recent times has changed the nature of debate on human euthanasia, and people on opposing sides have different arguments on human euthanasia. To understand the argument for and against euthanasia, it is substantial to understand the various form of euthanasia that exist: Voluntary euthanasia is when an act is done according to the wish of an individual that has pled for his life to be ended. Non voluntary euthanasia is when an act is done without the knowledge of the wishes of an individual …show more content…
While, the people opposing euthanasia think that “The fundamental social value of respect for life should be maintained, and killing is intrinsically wrong (Canadian Medical Association)”. They consider it as a murder, and curable clinical depressions. This essay takes a critical look at the both sides of argument to evaluate any valid reasoning behind the continued discussion of euthanasia. There is an increasing number of people suffering from chronic health issues, and physical disorders. According to the Public Health Agency of Canada, there are fourteen percent annual increase in people dying of chronic diseases such as cancers, neurological illness, and cardiovascular disorders. Chronical disease is a slow form of death after years of pain and suffering. Yet the criminalization of euthanasia and Physician assisted suicide (PAS) denies these suffering adults from the freedom to choose whether live or
The word Euthanasia comes from the Greek and means “good death” (http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/hp.asp) and in the range of this paper, it will be called physician assisted suicide or “active” euthanasia. The definition of “active” euthanasia is ending one’s life yourself or with aid of a doctor. It can be done in various different ways; however, the most common form is with a combination of drugs, usually given by a physician. ( http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/hp.asp) The reason Physician Assisted Suicide (or PAS) is an important issue in this country and around the world is that there are many people out there suffering from debilitating, incurable and intensely painful diseases that would like to end their lives with dignity and without suffering. (Leo & Lein, 2010, The Value of a Planned Death)
In this essay, I will discuss whether euthanasia is morally permissible or not. Euthanasia is the intention of ending life due to inevitable pain and suffering. The word euthanasia comes from the Greek words “eu,” which means good, and “thanatosis, which means death. There are two types of euthanasia, active and passive. Active euthanasia is when medical professionals deliberately do something that causes the patient to die, such as giving lethal injections. Passive euthanasia is when a patient dies because the medical professionals do not do anything to keep them alive or they stop doing something that was keeping them alive. Some pros of euthanasia is the freedom to decide your destiny, ending the pain, and to die with dignity. Some cons
For example, a patient has the right to refuse medical treatment. They also have the right to refuse resuscitation if they are in need of life support. Active or involuntary euthanasia refers to providing the means for someone to take their life or assisting with taking their life (“Euthanasia”). There are several important ethical issues related to euthanasia. One is allowing people who are terminally ill and suffering the right to choose death.
Euthanasia is the fact of ending somebody’s life when assisting him to die peacefully without pain. In most cases, it is a process that leads to end the suffering of human beings due to disease or illness. A person other than the patient is responsible for the act of euthanasia; for example a medical provider who gives the patient the shot that must kill him. When people sign a consent form to have euthanasia, it is considered voluntary, involuntary euthanasia is when they refuse. When people are not alert and oriented they are not allowed to sign any consent including the consent to euthanasia. When euthanasia is practiced in such situation, it is a non-voluntary euthanasia. In sum, people who practice voluntary euthanasia in honoring other
* Voluntary euthanasia: death administered to one who asks for it. In practice, truly voluntary euthanasia requests may be very rare, since the patient rarely gives informed consent because the alleged consent is influenced by depression, improperly treated pain or other factors that are not controlled but could be controlled.
to a request from that person. Involuntary Euthanasia is used to describe the killing of a person
Euthanasia can be defined as the following: “the intentional killing by act or omission of a dependent human being for his or her alleged benefit.” The key word here, obviously, is “intentional.” If the death is not intentional, it is not an act of euthanasia. Euthanasia can be voluntary as well as non-voluntary. The most recent case we have heard of in the news dealing with euthanasia is the Terri Schiavo case. In Schiavo’s case, the fact that the doctors took out her feeding tube was a non-voluntary form of euthanasia. Rather than having her own consent, her husband made the decision, making it non-voluntary. Her husband believed it was the best choice for her because she was in a vegetated state for over fifteen years. (Hentoff) But many people do not agree with his decision. They argue against legalizing euthanasia in itself.
I am writing to you today with both the interests of the public, and my own interests, on the topic of Euthanasia becoming legalized in British Columbia. In a 2013 poll conducted by Life Canada the findings were that in British Columbia 63% of Canadians believed that Assisted Suicide be brought into place, and 55% believed that Euthanasia should take action, although some hesitated because of the numbers of non-consensual Euthanasia deaths in Belgium. Having Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide legalized would not only be able to help the terminally ill and physically disabled decide how they wish for their life to end, but the legalization would also save a lot of time, money, and resources in hospitals and palliative care facilities. Although some laws such as section 241 of the Criminal Code would need to be reviewed, Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide could potentially end some people’s suffering, and save money and resources for the province.
Euthanasia is an action that result in the death of a person. There are four types of euthanasia, such as voluntary active euthanasia, nonvoluntary active euthanasia, voluntary passive euthanasia, and nonvoluntary passive euthanasia. Among the four types of euthanasia, voluntary active euthanasia or VAE is the most controversial ethical issue in the United States. It is the killing of a competent patient who decided to end his/her suffering by ending his/her life with the help of the physician. VAE is illegal in the Unites States; however, it is morally just. Voluntary active euthanasia is legitimately moral on the basis of Immanuel Kant’s human dignity, the utilitarian’s Greatest Happiness Principle, and James Rachel’s view of active euthanasia.
The debate on whether voluntary euthanasia should be legalized has been a controversial topic. Euthanasia is defined as ‘a deliberate intervention undertaken with the express intention of ending a life, to relieve intractable suffering’ [1]. Voluntary euthanasia refers to the patients who understand the terms in the consent and sign up under consciousness, while involuntary euthanasia is performed against patient's wishes and some people may regard it as a murder [1].
“Euthanasia is defined as a deliberate act undertaken by one person with the intention of ending life of another person to relieve that person's suffering and where the act is the cause of death.”(Gupta, Bhatnagar and Mishra) Some define it as mercy killing. Euthanasia may be voluntary, non voluntary and involuntary. When terminally ill patient consented to end his or her life, it is called voluntary euthanasia. Non voluntary euthanasia occurs when the suffering person never consented nor requested to end a life. These patients are incompetent to decide because they are either minor, in a comatose stage or have mental conditions. Involuntary euthanasia is conducted when it is against the will of the patient (Gupta, Bhatnagar, Mishra). Euthanasia can be either passive or active. Passive euthanasia means life-sustaining treatments are withheld and nothing is done to keep the patient alive. Active euthanasia occurs when a physician do something by giving drugs or substances that ends a patient’s life. (Medical News Today)
Today, medical interventions have made it possible to save or prolong lives, but should the process of dying be left to nature? (Brogden, 2001). Phrases such as, “killing is always considered murder,” and “while life is present, so is hope” are not enough to contract with the present medical knowledge in the Canadian health care system, which is proficient of giving injured patients a chance to live, which in the past would not have been possible (Brogden, 2001). According to Brogden, a number of economic and ethical questions arise concerning the increasing elderly population. This is the reason why the Canadian society ought to endeavor to come to a decision on what is right and ethical when it comes to facing death. Uhlmann (1998) mentions that individuals’ attitudes towards euthanasia differ. From a utilitarianism point of view – holding that an action is judged as good or bad in relation to the consequence, outcome, or end result that is derived from it, and people choosing actions that will, in a given circumstance, increase the overall good (Lum, 2010) - euthanasia could become a means of health care cost containment, and also, with specific safeguards and in certain circumstances the taking of a human life is merciful and that all of us are entitled to end our lives when we see fit.
More than likely, a good majority of people have heard about euthanasia at least once in their lifetime. For those out there who have been living under a rock their entire lives, euthanasia “is generally understood to mean the bringing about of a good death – ‘mercy killing’, where one person, ‘A’, ends the life of another person, ‘B’, for the sake of ‘B’.” (Kuhse 294). There are people who believe this is a completely logical scenario that should be allowed, and there are others that oppose this view. For the purpose of this essay, I will be defending those who are suffering from euthanasia.
Euthanasia is a medical procedure which speeds up the process of dying for people with incurable, painful, or distressing diseases. The patient’s doctor can stop treatment and instead let them die from their illness. It come from the Greek words for 'good' and 'death', and is also called mercy killing. Euthanasia is illegal in most countries including the UK . If you suffer from an incurable disease, you cannot legally terminate your life. However, in a number of European countries it is possible to go to a clinic which will assist you to die gracefully under some very strict circumstances.
The person may ask for help with dying, start refusing medical treatment, and they may start refusing to eat. Non-voluntary euthanasia is when a person is unable to make a decision and another person has to make the decision on their behalf. This may occur because the person is in a coma, too young, or senile. Involuntary euthanasia occurs when a person does not want to die but is killed anyways. This form of euthanasia is not acceptable, and it is typically associated with murder, depending on the situation.