Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Euthanasia pro and con
Debate on euthanasia
Debate against euthanasia
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Euthanasia pro and con
Euthanasia is described as, “Intentionally making someone die rather than allowing that person to die naturally. Put bluntly, euthanasia means killing in the name of compassion[...]In euthanasia, one person does something that directly kills another. For example, a doctor gives a lethal injection to a patient”(IAETF 1). While euthanasia advocates believe that American citizens should have the right to die, anti-euthanasia advocates believe that euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide defies nature and could be harmful to those who cannot defend themselves, such as disabled people. Due to the complexity of euthanasia, it is a morality issue, stemming from the question of whether or not doctors should be able to kill their patients in the name of compassion. Campaigns such as Right to Die - a …show more content…
Beginning in Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome, the majority of the populations had been supporters of physician-assisted suicide, and had even given it the name euthanasia, which literally means “good death.” Opinions began to change in the thirteenth century due to the introduction and rise of Christianity. The people of Christian and Jewish faith condemned euthanasia because it violated the gift given by God: life. Along with that, as stated in The Bible under the ten commandments, commandment number six is, “Thou shalt not kill” (Exodus 20: 13.). The sixth commandment forbids one person to kill another, which to many Christians, this includes a doctor killing a patient via a request. In modern times, the argument of whether or not euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide should be legalized had only grown more complicated, because of cases such as Mathilde Cramer - the wife of Mars Cramer who decided to legally use euthanasia after suffering from Waldenstrom’s Disease, and the many patients of Dr. Jack Kevorkian - an American pathologist otherwise known as Dr.
Those who advocate euthanasia have capitalized on people's confusion, ambivalence, and even fear about the use of modern life-prolonging technologies. Further, borrowing language from the abortion debate, they insist that the "right to choose" must prevail over all other considerations. Being able to choose the time and manner of one's death, without regard to what is chosen, is presented as the ultimate freedom. A decision to take one's life or to allow a physician to kill a suffering patient, however, is very different from a decision to refuse extraordinary or disproportionately burdensome treatment.
The topic of euthanasia and assisted suicide is very controversial. People who support euthanasia say that it is someone 's right to end their own life in the case of a terminal illness. Those in favor of this right consider the quality of life of the people suffering and say it is their life and, therefore, it is their decision. The people against euthanasia argue that the laws are in place to protect people from corrupt doctors. Some of the people who disagree with assisted suicide come from a religious background and say that it is against God’s plan to end one 's life. In between these two extreme beliefs there are some people who support assisted suicide to a certain degree and some people who agree on certain terms and not on others.
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.
The Author of the article claims that euthanasia is inherently wrong and can lead to drastic problems in our society with various support claims. In my paper, I shall summarize and evaluate the argument. In the end, I believe that it is unsuccessful and I will explain and defend my assessment.
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
The term Euthanasia originated from the Greek word for “good death.” It is the act of or practice of ending the life of a person either by lethal injection or the suspension of medical treatment (ProCon.org, 2013). Euthanasia is a controversial issue that compares one’s quality of life to ethics. Euthanasia can be examined as a form of suicide or a form of being merciful. Even so, does humanity have the right to determine if someone should die or not? Many that are governed by a faithful belief may see Euthanasia as a practice against the will of God. However, others may believe that mankind has the choice over their own lives, and that the belief of God is a theory.
Euthanasia is the intentional causing of a painless death. Euthanasia should be legal in every state. It is already legal in some areas and if put to a vote in every state, it most likely would become legal. Every state resident should be given the opportunity to vote on the issue. It should also the right of a competent patient to decide his own life, or death. If it is within an individual's rights to commit suicide it should be legal to ask for help if needed.
Assisted suicide can be a positive and a negative resolution to a sick person who will eventually die. If someone is sick and they are feeling pain they would not want to bear the pain anymore. The moral philosophy of Aristotle would determine whether assisted suicide is right or wrong by that the fact that Aristotle would state the three elements in any moral problem. There are three different things to remember when you are making a judgment. The act itself; the consequences of that act; and the moral agent which is the person doing the act in question.
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.
Euthanasia has been an ongoing debate for many years. Everyone has an opinion on why euthanasia should or should not be allowed but, it is as simple as having the choice to die with dignity. If a patient wishes to end his or her life before a disease takes away their quality of life, then the patient should have the option of euthanasia. Although, American society considers euthanasia to be morally wrong euthanasia should be considered respecting a loved one’s wishes. To understand euthanasia, it is important to know the rights humans have at the end of life, that there are acts of passive euthanasia already in practice, and the beneficial aspects.
Euthanasia is the process of killing a patient with the intention of relieving their suffering and pain. It is also commonly known as mercy killing, and many often do not agree with it most especially in cases where a terminal illness is not inclusive. While euthanasia has been legalized in certain states in the United States such as Oregon, a lot of opposition has arisen as to whom so legible to receiving this treatment.
Is it right to intentionally bring about the death of a person? The vast majority of people would instinctively answer this question “no,” unless it related to an act of war or perhaps self-defense. What if taking the life of the person would benefit that person by ending their suffering? Would it be morally acceptable to end their suffering? Questions like these are debated by those considering the morality of euthanasia, which is a very controversial topics in America. Euthanasia can be defined as “bringing about the death of another person to somehow benefit that person” (Pojman). The term implies that the death is intentional. Because there are several different types of euthanasia, it is difficult to make a blanket statement concerning the morality of euthanasia. This paper will discuss the particular morality of the passive and active forms of involuntary, nonvoluntary, and voluntary euthanasia. I believe that voluntary passive euthanasia is morally acceptable, while all other forms of euthanasia are ultimately immoral.
Euthanasia is very controversial topic in the world today. Euthanasia, by definition, is the act of killing someone painlessly ,especially someone suffering from an incurable illness. Many people find euthanasia morally wrong, but others find people have control over thier own bodies and have a right to die. A solution to this problem is to have the patient consent to euthansia and have legal documentation of the consent.
Passive euthanasia is letting someone die naturally and thought to be merciful hi the event of tragedy or illness. It is a kindness offered to prevent suffering. Active euthanasia is direct killing by means of medication either with or without the person's consent (Legg, 2017). Though people that have a right to life also have a right to death with dignity, directly killing/dying is morally worse than letting someone die. I believe the question that lies within is 'Is there intent to harm' when it comes to euthanasia and is the person who passively allows someone to die consented to do so? Though sometimes it may seem more merciful to actively euthanize or commit suicide, these are not morally acceptable. Even if the person expresses consent
Euthanasia is a medical procedure which speeds up the process of dying for people with incurable, painful, or distressing diseases. The patient’s doctor can stop treatment and instead let them die from their illness. It come from the Greek words for 'good' and 'death', and is also called mercy killing. Euthanasia is illegal in most countries including the UK . If you suffer from an incurable disease, you cannot legally terminate your life. However, in a number of European countries it is possible to go to a clinic which will assist you to die gracefully under some very strict circumstances.