Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Legal and ethical issues surrounding euthanasia
The effects of physician assisted suicide
Legal and ethical issues surrounding euthanasia
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Legal and ethical issues surrounding euthanasia
What is one to do when the end is at hand and suffering and pain is the only way to go? In America one might respond to their need as “oh no, poor person, I hope they get better”, what if they are not going to get better? What if they are just hoping that death will bring an end to their suffering? Euthanasia or physician assisted suicide, would do just that. However, physician assisted suicide is illegal in America being only legal in Oregon ,Washington , Montana and Vermont . In America , life is highly valued and praised. In America, health is one of the most important fields, new medicine and treatments are constantly being invented. However; when talking about life and how important it is, we must not forget about the different components to a complete life. Life consists of physical, physiological and spiritual wellness. Keeping someone alive against their own will is like denying them the right to peace and forcing them to suffer a long period of unnecessary misery. One issue faced when deciding whether euthanasia should be legalized or not is the quality of palliative care and the patient end of life suffering. Another issue is the validity of the Hippocratic Oath; can a doctor be trusted anymore? Is the Hippocratic Oath really there to provide patients with the best care they can get from their physicians? Lastly is the right to die, the debate on whether a patient has the right to decide to death. So, should someone who has been condemned to death have to continue to live and suffer until the end of their days arrives? The fact that euthanasia is illegal and kept illegal supports that idea. Euthanasia should be legalized; it would eliminate the pain and suffering of many people who suffer from terminal diseases. ... ... middle of paper ... ...ightingale Alliance, n.d. Web. 7 Nov. 2013. . "Greek Medicine - The Hippocratic Oath." U.S National Library of Medicine. U.S. National Library of Medicine, 02 July 2012. Web. 23 Oct. 2013. ProCon.org. "Top 10 Pros and Cons" ProCon.org. 18 May 2012. Web. 22 Oct. 2013. . "Transcript of the Constitution of the United States - Official Text." Transcript of the Constitution of the United States - Official Text. The Charters of Freedom, n.d. Web. 15 Oct. 2013.. "What Is Palliative Care?" Patient Web Site. American Academy Od Hospice and Palliative Medicine, n.d. Web. 22 Oct. 2013. .
killing and letting die. Some argue that letting die, which is the action considered to take
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
Euthanasia has been a long debated subject consisting of many opinions and believes. For this paper I will be providing my rationale on why I am for legalization of active voluntary euthanasia for terminally ill clients in Canada. Active voluntary euthanasia should be legalized because it respects the individual’s choice, it allows individuals to flourish in their passing, and reduces the individual from further suffering. These are all important components of bioethics, and are all good reasons why euthanasia is not a negative thing. Active voluntary euthanasia is “the active killing of a dying person” requested by the client themselves (Collier & Haliburton, 2011, p. 226). In the paper I will also be discussing about virtue ethics, the principle of autonomy, and care ethics.
...urary/February). The Continuing Challenge of Assisted Death. Journal Of Hospice And Palliative Nursing, 6, 46-59.
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.
Physician-assisted suicide should be a legal option, if requested, for terminally ill patients. For decades the question has been asked and a clear answer has yet to surface. It was formed out of a profound commitment to the idea that personal end-of-life decisions should be made solely between a patient and a physician. Can someone's life be put into an answer? Shouldn't someone's decision in life be just that; their decision? When someone has suffered from a car accident, or battled long enough from cancer, shouldn't the option be available? Assisted suicide shouldn't be seen as cheating death, but as a way to pay homage to the life once lived. As far as including the mentally challenged in this equation, I am against it. The mentally challenged, although less likely to grasp information, still has the physical awareness to grow. It can be subdued with medicine and psychotherapy. From personal experience I am a witness of being around mentally challenged adults who love life regardless of their conditions. Most don't have the ability to express a request such as life or death. Living life is a daily task just like it is for healthy citizens. Most if not all mentally challenged people aren't in any pain throughout their entire life. For this they shouldn't be targeted for assisted suicide. Death is an occurrence in life, whether it's unexpected or expected, it can't be cheated nor can it be avoided. The terminally ill should have the option to end their suffering with dignity.
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
Many people wonder if we as citizens have the right to die. There are some legal and illegal ways to go about doing so. Euthanasia is by law illegal in the United States. However, there are some states that have legalized physician assisted suicide. As we wait for more states to follow the steps of the other states, we wonder why they have not done so already. There have been many famous cases that occurred over the past couple decades that given states reason to legalize physician assisted suicide. Nonetheless, there are still the pros and cons to why physician assisted suicide should be legal or illegal. It is safe to say that the establishment of living wills, the patient bill of rights and natural death laws have allowed the U.S. to come a long way since 1906.
“The good death” - a literal translation that explains euthanasia; which is the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or even an irreversible coma. There are various types of euthanasia such as active euthanasia, passive euthanasia, involuntary euthanasia, voluntary euthanasia, and non-voluntary euthanasia. Among these, the most discussed ones are voluntary euthanasia and passive euthanasia. Per Dr. Jack Kevorkian's definition, voluntary euthanasia is a “conscious decision to die” made by the patient, and passive euthanasia is patient’s decision to withhold or withdraw treatment that helps sustain life to cause death. Both applications serve toward the same goal but voluntary euthanasia is a practice widely acceptable.
... possible treatment. “Unfortunately, even when medical advances and excellent hospice research in palliative care, severe indignity, pain and distress cannot always be controlled” (Anonymous 5). There are many conditions that a person would have to obtain before given the opportunity to choose to die. A person would have to be suffering from a terminal illness that would unlikely benefit from the discovery of a cure for that illness. Also as a direct result of the illness, the patient has to be suffering intolerable pain. Another requirement would be that they are mentally able to make the decision and are not forced into making a decision.
A recent survey by the Canadian Medical Association discovered that “ . . . 44 per cent of doctors would refuse a request for physician-assisted dying . . . ” (Kirkey 2). Euthanasia is defined as assisting a terminally ill patient with dying early. In many countries the legalization of this practice is being debated in many countries. All doctors against assisted suicide, including the 44 percent in Canada, are on the right side of the argument. Euthanasia should not be legalized because it is unnatural, it violates the Hippocratic Oath, and laws are to extensive.
There are many diseases that can't be cured or treated. So the patients ask the doctors to end their lives in order to relieve pain and suffering . This is called Euthanasia. Euthanasia has many different names, for example, doctor-assisted dying or mercy killing and many other names. (BBC, BBC, 2014) Euthanasia is always illegal but in some cases it is legal. Opponents of Euthanasia contend that those doctors have more responsibility to keep their patients alive as reflected by the Hippocratic Oath. Most people are not in Euthanasia's side. In this research I will be able to answer these questions:
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.
Euthanasia is a controversial issue. Many people believe that doctors should not prescribe any medication that ends a person’s life since it is considered to be against the Hippocratic Oath. The Hippocratic Oath states that doctors are professionally obliged to save lives. Some consider euthanasia to be immoral and others say that it is murder. Euthanasia should be legalized because it provides a way to relieve pain, brings relief to a person when their quality of life is low, relieves economic burden, and is simply a personal choice.
Should Euthanasia or Physician-Assisted Suicide be Legal? (2009). [webpage]. Retrieved March 10th, 2010 from http://euthanasia.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000126