Assisted Suicide Arguments Against Euthanasia

People should be able to live their life to the longest. Physician-assisted suicide is a controversial topic spreading throughout the United States due to the ethical issues surrounding the topic. Physician-assisted suicide is legal in a few states and other states have passed bills to make sure this does not happen. Even though some say that all have a right to die, physician-assisted suicide should not be legal because it would be too psychologically damaging to all involved. Having a right to die is what causes assisted suicide so controversial.

Life is never guaranteed and whether it is through an illness or an accident, we as humans are eventually going to die. Physicians Assisted suicide is one of the most controversial issues. The issue of doctor-assisted suicide has been the subject of the heated dispute in recent years. While some oppose the idea that a physician should aid in ending a life, others believe that physicians should be permitted in helping a patient to end his or her unbearable suffering when faced with a terminal illness. Furthermore, Physician-assisted suicide should be legal; it should be the patient’s right to decide when and how he or she should die.

There sometimes is a point that a human reaches in degeneration that modern medicines cannot aide or remedy. As described by Lewis Cohen, “Medication such as morphine can help the terminally ill manage pain, but it can’t ameliorate their agony at no longer being the same people that they were before the illness” (Cohen). The unbearable pain and loss of normalcy that accompanies those with terminal illnesses is what pushes them to consider assisted suicide. The mentality is seen simply as “if one is going to die anyway, then why not choose how and when.” Unfortunately, the choice of death for those with incurable circumstances has been twisted into other views and is being misinterpreted as a way for doctors to mercy kill their patients.

“The hippocratic oath, one of the most historically common physicians’ oaths, states that, ‘most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death...this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God.’” With this being said, in matters of life and death you have to really think and consider what is best for the patient and that you can’t mess with what God has planned. Physicians, well most anyways, believe that God has a plan and for them to mess with it is not right to do. Although, I still believe that euthanasia should be legal because life isn’t worth living whenever you’re in so much pain that life isn’t even worth living anymore.

Another issue with legalizing euthanasia would be that society would be too easily convinced to support it. "It would be hard to devise procedures that would protect people from being persuaded into giving their consent." (Foot, p. 112) There is no possible way to know if a person is giving their consent because they actually want to or maybe because they were persuaded to do

When a doctor administers the process or drugs that constitute voluntary active euthanasia, then that doctor acknowledges that it will end the individual’s life. Knowingly doing this, as a medical professional, is simply willingly killing an individual, which the social contract has always acknowledged as one of the worst acts an individual can commit. Intentional killing is always bad because it takes away everything that life entails, such as the pursuit of happiness and

There are real case incidents in which a 14 year old girl suffering from terminal cystic fibrosis is asking her country’s president for permission to end her life. She had self shot a video in which she says “I am tired of living this disease and she can authorize an injection through which I can sleep forever”. The girl's video has sparked a broader conversation about whether euthanasia should be legalized in the largely Catholic nation. According to me we should let euthanasia be legal as there is no significance in keeping them alive against their wish as we don’t know how much they are suffering. Another incident is where the woman moved to Oregon where euthanasia is legal to take advantage of Oregon’s death with Dignity Law.

Assisted suicide is a rather controversial issue in contemporary society. When a terminally ill patient formally requests to be euthanized by a board certified physician, an ethical dilemma arises. Can someone ethically end the life of another human being, even if the patient will die in less than six months? Unlike traditional suicide, euthanasia included multiple individuals including the patient, doctor, and witnesses, where each party involved has a set of legal responsibilities. In order to understand this quandary and eventually reach a conclusion, each party involved must have their responsibilities analyzed and the underlying guidelines of moral ethics must be investigated.

It would be fairly clear to declare euthanasia infeasible because life only lives once and euthanasia can provide an easy excuse for irresponsible families to pave the road to death for the patients. However, medical judgment can set the bar very high and further decrease this kind of situation. Doctor and what’s more, death is predestined for every life. Every respect for life or death contributes to helping people value death more, face death peacefully, which should truly be the best way to value the

Euthanasia Under a Microscope Euthanasian was first introduced to the world in the 5th century and has stirred up quite a debate ever since then. Euthanasian can simply be defined as when a medical professional uses lethal injection to end the patient’s life, but only if they are formally diagnosed with a terminal illness. A patient must undergo extensive medical testing to qualify as a candidate and it must be presented either before or at the time of the procedure. A few terminal illnesses that qualify patients for assisted suicide include: cancer, AIDS, Alzheimer’s disease, Parkinson’s disease, etc. These illnesses qualify for euthanasia because not only do that have low life expectancy rates, they’re also extremely painful.

The issue of Euthanasia has raged for centuries. The term euthanasia comes from a word in the Greek language that literally means, “easy (or good) death”. It is one of the most argument fraught public policy issues being debated, today. Also called “mercy killing”, euthanasia is the act of deliberately making or helping someone die, instead of allowing nature to take its course. Properly understood, there are two types of Euthanasia: Active and Passive.

INTRODUCTION Euthanasia alludes to the act of deliberately close a life keeping in mind the end goal to assuage torment and enduring. There are different euthanasia laws in each country. The British House of Lords Select Committee on Medical Ethics defines euthanasia as "a deliberate intervention undertaken with the express intention of ending a life, to relieve intractable suffering".[1] In the Netherlands, euthanasia is understood as "termination of life by a doctor at the request of a patient"". Euthanasia is sorted in diverse ways, which incorporate voluntary, non-voluntary, or automatic.

Euthanasia will incresing the happiness and decreses the pain at the same time so its morally correctly. Utilitarians do believe that one has rights ann control over their body and any decisions to be made about one’s body are up to them and no other authority. If a he volunteers to die in his own will, then it is their right to make his decision and people, even the government, has no right to

1 Introduction Active euthanasia is brought about when an individual administers or aids in the administration of a lethal substance to another ill or suffering individual. Stansham-Ford v Minister of Justice and Correctional Services (“Stansham-Ford) deals with the application for an order allowing such euthanasia to happen. The judgement of Fabricius J held that so long as certain requirements are met this order should be granted. Considering factors such as the right to life and the right to human dignity in light of this judgement the question is raised as to whether this active euthanasia should be allowed? 2 Current case Stansham-Ford deals with the application to be granted an order allowing a recognised medical practitioner to

Daily there are people who suffer from so many things. People suffer from illness, depression, or some form of disease that may be hard to live with. Some of these people just cannot stand to live anymore and request euthanasia. Justin Healey says explains “Euthanasia derives from the Greek for ‘eu’ (easy, good) and ‘thanatos’ (death) and refers to the practice of intentionally ending a life in order to relieve pain and suffering” (Justin Healey, 2013, pg. 1). When the physical or mental pain is too much to bare, people want the option to take their own life with the assistance of a physician.