Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Euthanasia legal and ethical issues
Euthanasia dilemma
The ethical dilemma of physician assisted suicide
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Euthanasia legal and ethical issues
Euthanasia is defined as an 'act of killing someone painlessly to relieve his or her suffering'[1]. It's etymology is derived from the Greek 'eu thanatos' which means a good death. It is a contentious issue that provokes strong arguments for and against changing UK legislation to permit it. The UK currently prohibits active euthanasia. Active euthanasia is an act where the intention is to end or deliberately shorten someone's life. A doctor will administer a drug such as morphine or potassium chloride. Such an act is considered to be murder and a doctor found guilty of this offence faces a long prison sentence. An extremely significant case which played a part in determining whether voluntary active euthanasia is illegal was the case of Dr Cox. His patient Lilian Boyes, who was seventy years old and suffering from severe rheumatoid arthritis, asked him to kill her. She was expected to die within a matter of days, but the pain she was suffering from was unbearable. Out of compassion he gave her a lethal dose of potassium chloride. As there was a possibility that she could have died from other causes due to her condition, he was only charged with attempted murder. Some people may believe that this case was unfair and the fact that Dr Cox was acting out of mercy and compassion should act in favour for him. Even with modern pain control people can still suffer right to the end of life. If the killing is done at the patients request it is called 'voluntary euthanasia'. If it is done without the patients request, even though they could have requested it before they were in a state which prevented them from doing so, then it is called inv... ... middle of paper ... ...stop treatment, withholding is to never give it and both are seen as legally equal. [3] Tony Hope, Julian Savulescu, Judith Hendrick. 'Medical Ethics and Law'. pp157. [4] Campbell, Alistair. Gillet, Grant. Jones, Gareth. 'Medical Ethics-Third Edition'. pp200 [5] Alison Davies. 'Briefing notes on voluntary euthanasia/assisted dying.' [6] In fact, the term 'best interest' is easily miss understood as meaning the patients 'wishes'. What it really means is what will preserve their health or prevent them from dying. [7] www.bbc.co.uk/print//religion/ethics/euthanasia/rcatholic.shtml [8] Robert A Bowie, 'Ethical Studies'. pp190. [9] 'Declaration on Euthanasia' 1980. [10] www.hospicecare.com/Ethics/fohrdoc.htm [11] www.ves.org.uk [12] Glover, 1977, pp.92-93. [13] 'Kusha', 1991, pp302.
due to the loss of a large amount of blood after having had her throat
In the midst of my despair, great grandma delivered the final blow. She stopped humming and uttered these dreaded words: "It only hurts for a minute."
must die." God spoke to her and she acted upon the support of a loved one.
In this essay I will be analysing the morality of voluntary active euthanasia (VAE). I will focus on the argument that if such an act is considered morally acceptable, it can only lead down a slippery slope in which society becomes grossly unrecognizable in terms of the value of life. This essay will examine the strengths and weaknesses of this argument and the moral principles which underpin it to determine whether or not it remains a convincing argument to VAE.
I picked voluntary euthanasia as my written assignment topic this week because while reading through it, my mother’s comment of that she wants to just pass away quickly, rather suffering slowly and be a burden to everyone around here a long time ago came to my mind. She made that comment after visiting someone dying from cancer, so I understand why she made that remark. The reasons cited for voluntary euthanasia is to end the suffering and stop being a burden to everyone around you and is asking for health professionals to assist in ending your life (Young, 2014). Not many countries as we learned has legalized euthanasia, but a few like the Netherlands has set 5 very strict conditions for asking for voluntary euthanasia which are: “suffering
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.
In the essay “The Morality of Euthanasia”, James Rachels uses what he calls the argument from mercy. Rachels states, “If one could end the suffering of another being—the kind from which we ourselves would recoil, about which we would refuse to read or imagine—wouldn’t one?” He cites a Stewart Alsop’s story in which he shares a room with a terminally ill cancer patient who he named Jack. At the end of the recounting, Alsop basically asks, “were this another animal, would not we see to it that it doesn’t suffer more than it should?” Which opens up the question of, “Why do humans receive special treatment when we too are animals?” We would not let animals suffer when there is a low chance of survival, so why is it different for us humans?
As patients come closer to the end of their lives, certain organs stop performing as well as they use to. People are unable to do simple tasks like putting on clothes, going to the restroom without assistance, eat on our own, and sometimes even breathe without the help of a machine. Needing to depend on someone for everything suddenly brings feelings of helplessness much like an infant feels. It is easy to see why some patients with terminal illnesses would seek any type of relief from this hardship, even if that relief is suicide. Euthanasia or assisted suicide is where a physician would give a patient an aid in dying. “Assisted suicide is a controversial medical and ethical issue based on the question of whether, in certain situations, Medical practioners should be allowed to help patients actively determine the time and circumstances of their death” (Lee). “Arguments for and against assisted suicide (sometimes called the “right to die” debate) are complicated by the fact that they come from very many different points of view: medical issues, ethical issues, legal issues, religious issues, and social issues all play a part in shaping people’s opinions on the subject” (Lee). Euthanasia should not be legalized because it is considered murder, it goes against physicians’ Hippocratic Oath, violates the Controlled
Any discussion that pertains to the topic of euthanasia must first include a clear definition of the key terms and issues. With this in mind, it should be noted that euthanasia includes both what has been called physician-assisted "suicide" and voluntary active euthanasia. Physician-assisted suicide involves providing lethal medication(s) available to the patient to be used at a time of the patient’s own choosing (Boudreau, p.2, 2014). Indifferently, voluntary active euthanasia involves the physician taking an active role in carrying out the patient’s request, and usually involves intravenous delivery of a lethal substance. Physician-assisted suicide is felt to be easier psychologically for the physician and patient than euthanasia because
and die "without being willed to anyone or anything" (112). She believes that someone should die without being willed to anyone to be able to leave the Earth, and escape the shackles of pain. She may seem very boorish and vicious, but without her morphine, she cannot escape her pain, and must resort to yelling and acting rude. She has been in her bed, through the sickest of times "her face was the color of a dirt pillowcase, and the corners of her mouth glistened with wet…" (106), yet still able to fight.
When she went into surgery in St. John’s Medical Center in St. Louis, we were all there and confidant that everything would go as planned. The doctors came out about one hour into the surgery to inform us that the damage was much worse than they initially thought. They told us that they would keep us updated on her progress. Two hours later they came out to tell us that her heart stopped beating and they tried everything they could to revive her, but she had died.
...dition, so the doctor thought that this weakness was the reason she died.What really killed her was being put back into the role that was forced and expected of her. When her husband walked in, all of her feminine freedom vanished.
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.
She died of a suicide and she that because at a certain point in her life she had enough of suffering.
In the following essay, I argue that euthanasia is not morally acceptable because it always involves killing, and undermines intrinsic value of human being. The moral basis on which euthanasia defends its position is contradictory and arbitrary in that its moral values represented in such terms as ‘mercy killing’, ‘dying with dignity’, ‘good death’ and ‘right for self-determination’ fail to justify taking one’s life.