Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Short note on Mercy killing
Topics about medical ethics
Topics about medical ethics
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Mercy killing is the act of taking someone’s life painlessly. Victims of mercy killing “include persons who are in a vegetative state or those who suffer from an incurable and painful disease or condition.” People argue and refute mercy killing whether it is acceptable or not. It is neither acceptable nor wrong, arguably it is required to be a necessity when dealing with cases when there are no other options than surviving in the world in misery. In Of Mice and Men, John Steinbeck’s character, Lennie, mentally ill, has committed a treacherous act of murder by mere accident because he was panicked. He is mercy killed by his close friend and sort of master, George, so that he will no longer be in misery and suffering. Mercy killing is a …show more content…
viably justified practice, even if it may have people concerned about it for moral or religious reasons, because of the fact that some people are living a life in pure suffering without any chance of being saved. Killing in itself is consequently a morally reprehensible action, although, when considering the conditions or state of being of a human and himself deciding he would live a greater pain in life than in death, the act of killing becomes that of mercy rather than that of hatred.
This is the reason what George did in Of Mice and Men is acceptable even if not liked. After the killing of Curley’s wife, Curley was mad and was obligated in his own mind to find moral retribution that would never be settled until Lennie was suffering and, after suffering, dead. This is a astonishing example of when George was obligated as primary carer and close friend to Lennie to help him pass as quickly and painlessly as possible. In a situation where someone is suffering, like Lennie, from some condition, we are obligated to help the person pass as painlessly as possible. This is why George has necessity to help Lennie pass and why mercy killing is justifiably acceptable. Mercy killing, the act of taking someone who is undertaking immense pain or suffering, is required in situations such as Lennie’s, where someone is in the utmost danger of a slow, painful, and torturous death. George and Lennie’s situation offers a prime example of a mercy kill in ethical circumstance which the assisted death of another should be excused as morally justifiable. Therefore, mercy killing should not only be allowed, but we are obligated to act in a situation where someone is suffering as much as
this.
In “Killing, Letting Die, and the Trolley Problem,” Judith Thomson confronts the moral dilemma of how death comes about, whether one meets their demise through natural causes or by the hands of another (Shafer-Landau 544). If one does in fact lose their life through the action or inaction of another person, a second dilemma must also be considered. Does it matter whether a person was killed or simply allowed to die? The moral debate that arises from these issues is important because if forms opinions that ultimately sets the tone for what is socially acceptable behavior. Social issue such as legalization of euthanasia, abortions, and the distribution of medical resources all hinge on the “killing vs letting die problem”.
Is killing someone bad if they were protecting them from someone else? What if that person was going to die anyway? is that a reason to kill them? In the book Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck, George kills Lennie because he thinks he absolutely has to in order to stop future incidents. It seems like George killing Lennie was a sign of mercy. Lennie and George were friends and Curley was going to kill Lennie. Furthermore, people would think about the killing as a way out for George. He should be punished for killing Lennie because he broke his promise to Lennie’s aunt Clara by not protecting Lennie, He wanted to be alone since the beginning of the book, and Lennie had a lot to offer to society.
George felt though an extremely difficult choice, killing Lennie himself was the right decision. Curley was gonna get his revenge and George did not want that because he did not want Lennie to die painfully. “‘I’ll kill the big son-of-a-bitch myself. I’ll shoot him in the guts.’”(Steinbeck 96). When Lennie killed Curley’s wife, Curley wanted to give him the most painful death. Curley wanted to shoot Lennie in the stomach which wouldn’t kill you at first, Instead you would bleed out slowly and painfully. George didn’t want Lennie to suffer so he knew he had to get to Lennie before Curley did and kill Lennie the fastest and least painful death he could which he did. Lennie would be arrested and thrown in jail for
Campbell, Courtney. "'Aid-in-Dying' and the taking of Human Life." Journal of Medical Ethics. 18.3 (1992 ): 128-134. Web. 2 March 2015.
About 45% of people in the 1930s believed that mercy killing was necessary for children born deformed or for people with mental handicaps (Moyers). In John Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men, the novel ends when George Milton realizes that to save his companion, Lennie Small, from his mental disability, he has to kill him. The book depicts it as a friend saving Lennie from the pain and suffering that he might go through in the future. The action should not be justified as saving him, but rather as a crime, ripping him away from his future and his life. Lennie’s death was a murder, not a mercy killing.
Should George have shot his friend Lennie? George probably did the right thing by shooting Lennie. How can we condemn George for sparing his friend Lennie the pain and fear of being killed by someone else? He did something society sees as wrong, but he did it for a good reason. Lennie didn’t deserve to die, but there was no other alternative. Curley wanted to kill Lennie, and since George cared for Lennie, he figured the best thing would be for him to put Lennie out of his misery.
Euthanasia is a word derived from Greek that has the etymological meaning of an easy death through the alleviation of pain (Moreno, 1995). Through the course of history, the signification of the term has changed and evolved in many different definitions. A useful definition of euthanasia on which we will base this essay, is named ‘mercy killing’, which signifies deliberately putting an end to someone’s life to avoid further suffering, as stated by Michael Manning in 1998. The euthanasia debate possesses a strong significance in our modern society. A discussion conducted by both scholars and politicians is going on whether physicians have the right to hasten the death of an individual by the administration of poison. In this essay
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.
The approach of physician-assisted suicide respects an individual’s need for personal dignity. It does not force the terminally ill patient to linger hopelessly, and helplessly, often at great cost to their psyche. It drive’s people mad knowing they are going to die in a short period of time, suffering while they wait in a hospital bed.
“Michael Manning, MD, in his 1998 book Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide: Killing or Caring?, traced the history of the word euthanasia: ‘The term euthanasia.originally meant only 'good death,'but in modern society it has come to mean a death free of any anxiety and pain, often brought about through the use of medication.” It seems there has always been some confusion and questions from our society about the legal and moral questions regarding the new science of euthanasia. “Most recently, it has come to mean'mercy killing' — deliberately putting an end to someone’s life in order to spare the individual’s suffering.’” I would like to emphasize the words “to spare the individual’s suffering”.
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.
Mercy killing has touched the lives of many people, with indeterminant reasons which have been baffling judicial courts for many years. People claim to kill an individual to relieve his/her constant pain, but the things that occur during the death gives doubt into the community’s mind causing great conflict in society. In Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck, an example of this situation is presented when a long friendship ends after one of the friends kills the other in order to save the other from future harm. The friendship is between George and Lennie, who met at an early age and traveled together during the Great Depression. Lennie has a disability which makes him act incompetent and childish causing George to take care of him throughout
Physician Assisted Murder & nbsp ; Physician assisted suicide is illegal in all states except Oregon. Physician assisted suicide is defined by Religious Tolerance.org. A physician supplies information and/or the means of committing suicide to a person, so that they can easily terminate their own life. The decision of when and where the time of our death should occur is one that only God has the right to decide. Because no person or doctor has the right to end a life, physician assisted suicide should be illegal.
Throughout the course of history, death and suffering have been a prominent topic of discussion among people everywhere. Scientists are constantly looking for ways to alleviate and/or cure the pain that comes with the process of dying. Treatments typically focus on pain management and quality of life, and include medication and various types of therapy. When traditional treatments are not able to eliminate pain and suffering or the promise of healing, patients will often consider euthanasia or assisted suicide. Assisted suicide occurs when a person is terminally ill and believes that their life is not worth living anymore. As a result of these thoughts and feelings, a physician or other person is enlisted to “assist” the patient in committing suicide. Typically this is done by administering a lethal overdose of a narcotic, antidepressant or sedative, or by combining drugs to create an adverse reaction and hasten the death of the sick patient. Though many people believe that assisted suicide is a quick and honorable way to end the sufferings of a person with a severe illness, it is, in fact, morally wrong. Assisted suicide is unethical because it takes away the value of a human life, it is murder, and it opens the door for coercion of the elderly and terminally ill to seek an untimely and premature death. Despite the common people’s beliefs, assisted suicide is wrong and shouldn’t be legalized.
It is a big question that most people often struggle with to decide when it is consider appropriate to assist an individual with mercy killing. In 1993, Robert Latimer a Saskatchewan farmer took the life of his twelve-year old daughter Tracy in an act of mercy killing. Latimer’s daughter suffered from the most dreadful form of cerebral palsy. She was severely disabled and had a mind of a four month old baby. Tracy was confined to a wheelchair and had endured multiple operations. She couldn’t walk, talk, or feed herself and she was in constant pain. After Robert Latimer learned that his daughter needed to go through another round of surgery, he knew he had to do something to save her from going through more pain. Therefore, Mr. Latimer decided