More handpicked essays just for you.
Ethical issues surrounding euthanasia
Ethical issues surrounding euthanasia
Arguments against active euthanasia
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Ethical issues surrounding euthanasia
Euthanasia was a term that once was used to describe a peaceful way of gently dying, but over the past two centuries the use of this practice by the medical community has redefined the procedure, how it is applied, and who has the right to make such a directive (Boudreau & Somerville, 2014). This essay will delve into the two primary types of euthanasia (active and passive), the ethical issues rose by each type, and the laws about euthanasia in the state of Arizona. The consideration of legal euthanasia and assisted suicide has numerous proponents and antagonist that belief that it is the ultimate form of relief to those who are health stricken and strong bases who hold religious belief against how one leaves this world.
Active Euthanasia Active euthanasia is the common form of euthanasia when the term is used. It can be done voluntary or involuntary, depending on the patient’s condition, in which a medical procedure is used to quall ones pain and suffering. Voluntary is done by the consenting patient who has willingly made the decision to end their own life. Involuntary euthanasia is decided when one’s charged caregiver, usually a family member or predetermined legal executor, selects the option as the patient is incapacitated and cannot
…show more content…
This method is highly controversial as the patient is often involved is some form of traumatic injury or health ailment and medical science has applied as much service as possible to the patient, but there is not resource available to prolong life in a form that would ever be enjoyable or productive. The conundrum with passive euthanasia is the ethical question of why should someone have the ability decided the outcome of someone else’s life without knowing all of the true remedies or working off of their own medical
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
The issue at hand is whether physician-assisted suicide should be legalized for patients who are terminally ill and/or enduring prolonged suffering. In this debate, the choice of terms is central. The most common term, euthanasia, comes from the Greek words meaning "good death." Sidney Hook calls it "voluntary euthanasia," and Daniel C. Maguire calls it "death by choice," but John Leo calls it "cozy little homicides." Eileen Doyle points out the dangers of a popular term, "quality-of-life." The choice of terms may serve to conceal, or to enhance, the basic fact that euthanasia ends a human life. Different authors choose different terms, depending on which side of the issue they are defending.
There are two types of euthanasia: passive and active. Passive or voluntary euthanasia refers to withholding life saving treatments or medical technology to prolong life. For example, a patient has the right to refuse medical treatment. They also have the right to refuse resuscitation if they are in need to be placed on life support. Active or involuntary euthanasia refers to providing the means for someone to take their life or assisting with taking their life (“Euthanasia” Discovering).
Should euthanasia be allowed or not? It has become a very controversial issue nowadays. Velleman and Hooker have different perspectives on euthanasia, and whether there should be laws permitting voluntary and non-voluntary euthanasia. Although there are well-reasoned arguments on both sides, I would strongly agree with Hooker's argument that there should be a law permitting voluntary euthanasia when it is for the wellbeing of the person and that each individual should be able to make their own decision.
The issue of physician assisted suicide has been around for quite a while. There has been many court cases on it to make it legalized but all of it has been struck down by the Supreme Court. What seem to be a lost cause in the past is now becoming a real possibility as America moves further into the twenty-first century. As citizens increase their support for PAS, many states are beginning to draft bills to legalize this cause, with tough restriction and regulation of course. In 1997, Oregon became the first state to legalized physician assisted suicide for the terminally ill. Soon after, three other states (Washington, Vermont, and Montana) follow Oregon’s footstep while two other states are inching closer to making this procedure legal. Even so, there are still many people against PAS and are constantly fighting this from becoming legal. With the rise of popularity on this issue, the debate on whether one has the right to end their life, and the morality of this issue are reason why the UTA community should care about this topic and why it is worth exploring the three position concerning PAS. In this paper, I will discuss the three main position on this debate: that physician assisted suicide should be illegal, that physician assisted suicide should be limited to terminally ill patient, and that physician assisted suicide should be available for everyone.
The right to assisted suicide is a significant topic that concerns people all over the United States. The debates go back and forth about whether a dying patient has the right to die with the assistance of a physician. Some are against it because of religious and moral reasons. Others are for it because of their compassion and respect for the dying. Physicians are also divided on the issue. They differ where they place the line that separates relief from dying--and killing. For many the main concern with assisted suicide lies with the competence of the terminally ill. Many terminally ill patients who are in the final stages of their lives have requested doctors to aid them in exercising active euthanasia. It is sad to realize that these people are in great agony and that to them the only hope of bringing that agony to a halt is through assisted suicide.When people see the word euthanasia, they see the meaning of the word in two different lights. Euthanasia for some carries a negative connotation; it is the same as murder. For others, however, euthanasia is the act of putting someone to death painlessly, or allowing a person suffering from an incurable and painful disease or condition to die by withholding extreme medical measures. But after studying both sides of the issue, a compassionate individual must conclude that competent terminal patients should be given the right to assisted suicide in order to end their suffering, reduce the damaging financial effects of hospital care on their families, and preserve the individual right of people to determine their own fate.
Euthanasia is defined as the act of killing someone who is terminally ill or those who are seriously injured in a reasonably painless way for reasons of compassion (Diaconescu). There are two types of administering euthanasia, which are Active and Passive euthanasia. Active euthanasia is when the medical professionals or another person intentionally does something that causes the patient to die. An example of active euthanasia is killing a patient using lethal injection. Passive euthanasia is when the patient dies because the medical professionals don't do or stops doing something to extend the patient’s life or when they stop doing something that is keeping the patient alive. An example of passive euthanasia are turning off life support machines, disconnecting fe...
There are two main classifications of euthanasia: voluntary and involuntary. Voluntary euthanasia is conducted with the consent of the patient while involuntary euthanasia is conducted without consent from the patient themselves, but with the consent from another person. With this, there are two procedural classifications of euthanasia which include passive and active euthanasia. Passive euthanasia happens when life-sustaining treatments are withheld – the doctor doesn’t “know” that the patient
Euthanasia and assisted suicide is known as a process in which an individual (sick or disabled) engages in an act that leads to his or her own death with the help of physicians or family members to end pain and suffering. There are several other terms used for this process, such as active euthanasia or passive euthanasia. Active euthanasia refers to what is being done to actively end life while passive euthanasia is referred as eliminating a treatment that will prolong a patient’s life, which will eventually lead to death (Levy et al., 2103, p. 402). Euthanasia and assisted suicide pose a significant ethical issue today, and understanding the issue requires examining the different principles, such as the ethical issue, professional code of conduct, strength and limitations, autonomy and informed consent, beneficence and nonmaleficence, distribution, and confidentiality and truthfulness.
The ethical debate regarding euthanasia dates back to ancient Greece and Rome. It was the Hippocratic School (c. 400B.C.) that eliminated the practice of euthanasia and assisted suicide from medical practice. Euthanasia in itself raises many ethical dilemmas – such as, is it ethical for a doctor to assist a terminally ill patient in ending his life? Under what circumstances, if any, is euthanasia considered ethically appropriate for a doctor? More so, euthanasia raises the argument of the different ideas that people have about the value of the human experience.
Euthanasia is put into two categories: Passive and Active. In Passive Euthanasia, doctors will i...
Physician -assisted suicide has been a conflict in the medical field since pre- Christian eras, and is an issue that has resurfaced in the twentieth century. People today are not aware of what the term physician assisted suicide means, and are opposed to listening to advocates’ perspectives. Individuals need to understand that problems do not go away by not choosing to face them. This paper’s perspective of assisted suicide is that it is an option to respect the dignity of patients, and only those with deathly illness are justified for this method.
Meaning, "good death". But the word “euthanasia” today means taking action to achieve a good death. Euthanasia is often used by doctors; the doctor would prepare the patient a lethal dose of drugs and administer the drugs to them or the doctor injects the patient with lethal injections. There are two different forms of euthanasia, active and passive. Active euthanasia is the hastening of a persons’ death by injections or a different form of assisted suicide while passive euthanasia is the withholding of treatment or medications that are currently keeping the patient alive (Barbuzzi, p.1, 2014). Informed consent from the patient is required for both passive and active euthanasia. . According to the Barbuzzi, informed consent is, “A patient’s expression of knowledge and acceptance of the risks, benefits, and alternative treatment options of a medical procedure and subsequent permission to a physician to perform the procedure” (Barbuzzi, p.1 2014).Suicide, self-deliverance, auto-euthanasia, aid-in-dying, assisted suicide, physician-assisted suicide, physician-assisted dying can all be justified by the supporters of the right to die movement for the following
“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)
Euthanasia is a word whose roots can be traced back to Greece where it meant good death. It encompasses various dimensions, from active where something is introduced to cause death, to passive where treatment or supportive actions are withheld. It also varies from voluntary euthanasia where one consents to it, to involuntary where a guardian can give consent and doctor assisted in which the doctors prescribes the medication and a third party or patient administers the prescription to cause death. Wishes for premature death have significantly contributed to the long debate regarding the role of this practice in the current health care. The debate however cuts across dynamic and complex aspects like ethical, legal, health, human rights, economic, religious, social, spiritual and cultural aspects of the enlightened society (Math & Chaturvedi, p. 889). Here, this intricate issue is argued from both sides of the ongoing debate and also the plight of the caregivers and the victims.