Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Euthanasia history essay
The ethical dilemma of assisted suicide
Introduction a bout euthanasia
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Today, voluntary euthanasia is getting closer to being legalized in more than just one state in the United States. “‘Voluntary’ euthanasia means that the act of putting the person to death is the end result of the person’s own free will” (Bender 19). “ Voluntary euthanasia is an area worthy of our serious consideration, since it would allow patients who have exhausted all other reasonable options to choose death rather than continue suffering” (Bender 19). The question of whether or not voluntary euthanasia should be legalized is a major debate that has been around for years. Because the issue of whether people should have the right to choose how they want to live or die is so complex. With the advances in technology today we have made it possible to keep a person alive for longer periods of time, even when a person is permanently unconscious or has brain damage. However it seems reasonable to believe that there are many conditions in which voluntary euthanasia should be allowed, and there are many organizations that support the choice of voluntary euthanasia. So why is it that so many do not support the choice of the way a person wants to live or die? There are many common arguments people have against voluntary euthanasia. One argument against voluntary euthanasia is that “the old, disabled and incurably ill would feel they should choose voluntary euthanasia so that they were not a burden on others….” (Anonymous Common 1). However there is no real evidence to show that this problem will arise if voluntary euthanasia is legalized. Another argument is “there is always a possibility of an incorrect diagnosis or the discovery of a treatment that will permit either survival or recovery” (Anonymous Objections 1). This is so... ... middle of paper ... ... 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. Legalizing voluntary euthanasia is all about having a choice. Most people today believe that everyone should be given the right to choose how they live and die. It’s not your life, if you can’t choose when to let go.
When faced with a terminal illness a person has to go through a process of thinking. What will happen to me? How long will I suffer? What kind of financial burden am I going to leave with my family when I am gone? What are my options? For many years the only legal options were to try a treatment plan, palliative care, hospice, and eventually death. For residents of Washington State, Oregon, and Vermont there is another option. They have the option to end their own life with a prescription from their physicians.
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.
Terminally ill patients deserve the right to have a dignified death. These patients should not be forced to suffer and be in agony their lasting days. The terminally ill should have this choice, because it is the only way to end their excruciating pain. These patients don’t have
Euthanasia, the right to die, death with dignity – no matter what you call it – should be readily available to all humans who wish to die. Euthanasia, as defined by MediLexicon’s medical dictionary, is “a quiet, painless death” or “the intentional putting to death of a person with an incurable or painful disease intended as an act of mercy” (----). There is one absolute certain in life – death. It is one matter that we have no choice in, we will all die. But shouldn’t we have some say in how, when, and where we will die? We are the ones who lived, after all. With the rise of support and advocacy of euthanasia, we might just be able to have some say in our deaths.
People who agree with euthanasia sat that the voluntary form of euthanasia will not lead to involuntary euthanasia. After much research, it has been found that there would be millions of situations each year that do not fall clearly into either category. An example of this would be an elderly man in a nursing home is asked to sign a form consenting to be killed. This man can barely read his newspaper in the morning, let alone read a form that someone hands to him and tells him to sign. Would this be voluntary or involuntary? (Johansen) One can argue either side. Researchers say that legalized euthanasia would most likely progress to a point where people are expected to volunteer for assisted death. Just as if your veterinarian says your old dog would be better put out of his or her misery by putting her to sleep, 10 years from now, a doctor would ask you, as the closest family member to your father, to approve a form of euthanasia because your father’s quality of life was not worth living. (Gallagher) The movement from voluntary to involuntary euthanasia would be somewhat like the movement of abortion. People who agree with euthanasia state that abortion is something that a woman chooses to do, that it is not forced on her and that voluntary euthanasia will not be forced on them either. But it is not an issue of force; it is an issue of the way laws concerning euthanasia can be expanded once it is declared legal.
Another reason a patient may opt to euthanasia is to die with dignity. The patient, fully aware of the state he or she is in, should be able choose to die in all their senses as opposed to through natural course. A patient with an enlarged brain tumor can choose to die respectively, instead of attempting a risky surgery that could leave the patient in a worse condition then before the operation, possibly brain-dead. Or a patient with early signs of Dementia or Alzheimer’s disease may wish to be granted euthanization before their disease progresses and causes detrimental loss of sentimental memories. Ultimately it should be the patient’s choice to undergo a risky surgery or bite the bullet, and laws prohibiting euthanasia should not limit the patient’s options.
“When a patient says, ‘Help me doctor,’ he is assuming that his doctor is on the side of his life.” This quote by Dr.Margaret Cottle , who is a palliative care physician , shows the mentality that most patients have when it comes to patient care. Euthanasia is a very controversial topic that has been debated on throughout the years. Whether it may be active euthanasia, passive euthanasia, voluntary euthanasia, involuntary euthanasia, indirect or physician assisted the morals and reasoning behind each are controversial. Though some people may believe euthanasia may be justified in a critical situation and critical punishment, euthanasia should be prohibited because euthanasia weakens societies respects for the sanctity of life, euthanasia might not be in the person’s best interest, and euthanasia affects other peoples rights, not just the patients.
The fear associated with death is powerful, but even more so is the fear of living an unfulfilling life full of pointless suffering. This spurs the belief for those in such situations that we as bodied people have the power to control our fate. Many movements involved with Euthanasia and Physician Assisted Suicide (PAS) have started internationally with that phrase in mind. Euthanasia is defined as, “The painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease, or is in an irreversible coma.” Christopher Docker defines PAS as, " ... the provision by a doctor, consciously and legally, to a patient who has completely requested it, of the means for that patient to end his or her own life." (Docker 8) These groups focus on the question of why should we endure untreatable suffering, especially when modern technology does nothing to alleviate the pain. Terminally ill patients should have the right to choose a merciful release.
The voluntary active euthanasia is legitimately moral. It is morally right for a person to seek euthanasia because it is their freedom or autonomy to control their own lives. It ends the suffering of the patient without harming other people. Furthermore, it prevents the person to suffer by giving him/her lethal injection or medication that prevents a person to die slowly with pain. On the other hand, the arguments against euthanasia are not sound. A thorough assessment will protect patient who request euthanasia for the benefits of others. A patient who seek for euthanasia does not use him/herself as means, but as ends to respect his/her own humanity. Furthermore, God as a benevolent will not allow a person to suffer which endorse the purpose of euthanasia – to end suffering. Therefore, voluntary active euthanasia should be legalized in the United States.
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].
Gay-Williams notes that euthanasia could cause the patient to miss out on values that can only be obtained through suffering. “Suffering is surely a terrible thing, and we have a clear duty to comfort those in need and to ease their suffering when we can. But suffering is also a natural part of life with values for the individual and for others that we should not overlook” Gay-Williams. Also, there are usually options that have not yet been explored other than euthanasia. Examples could include alternative treatments or even experimental procedures. Rachels emphasizes that passive euthanasia is slow and extremely painful, but this does not have to be the case. Often physicians are able to adequately control the patient’s pain, allowing them to be more at
Over the past half century, the percentage of Americans who say doctors should have a right to help end an incurably ill patient’s life has doubled to about seventy percent. One of the strongest points euthanasia supporters have is the desire for independence, the urge for people to choose a course of action that is based on their personal values. When the person involved is suffering from an intolerable pain, the use of euthanasia is there to relieve them. A supporter of euthanasia might claim that respecting the right of a patient to choose should also include respecting that person’s ch...
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.
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 .
Within the medical community euthanasia is a controversial issue which arises when the death could be a viable and acceptable alternative to life. According to Medical News Today, euthanasia is defined as “a deliberate action with the express intention of ending a life to relieve intractable, persistent, and unstoppable suffering.” The practice has been deemed illegal in a variety of countries and states, but some people may sympathize with the patient’s desire to end suffering through death. With all the medical advances over time, society has been able to keep individuals biologically alive. Yet certain terminal diseases could cause so much suffering and pain that some people rather die instantly then wait to live for only a bit longer. A