Controversy Over Euthanasia Essay

In this oath there is a line stating: “I WILL MAINTAIN the utmost respect for human life.” Allowing physicians to assist in suicide could blur the sacred relationship between doctors and patients for good. Patients could fear that that may be receiving lethal drugs instead of being provided the appropriate care. The critics of the assisted suicide procedure argue that such a process devalues human life and tends to promote suicide as an alternative to personal suffering. It blurs the line between healing and dying.

“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.

The ethical and legal implications of Physician assisted suicide (PAS) have been debated for centuries. Many countries around the world, including the UK, see suicidality as a punishable crime; however, despite this long-held position of criminalising it, opinions on assisted suicide remain fiercely divided (citation). Although the British Medical Association (BMA) has adapted a neutral stance on assisted suicide, it is important to understand that the BMA believes that ongoing improvements in palliative care allow patients to die with dignity and legalizing such behaviour will lead to an unfair divide between medical professionals who participate and those who do not (citation). This essay will examine both sides of the argument by exploring

When you hear the word death or you hear that someone has died today in the news or on the television I know a lot of people think “Man, I feel sorry for the family that they have to go through that.” or they thank god that it was not them or their family members.” Sadly though people try to push away death and push away the fact that everyone dies at one point in time. This is even truer when they witness their own family member in the hospital with a critical condition that the doctors cannot fix even with modern medicines on the doctor’s side. Another such time would be when a person’s family member is diagnosed with an incurable sickness that is fatal.

Eventually most countries decided that if in fact euthanasia was not ethical and in turn needs to be illegal. Euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide should be illegal because it is against the hippocratic oath,

Historically, as in ancient Greek and Roman times, euthanasia and physician assisted death (EAS), in all forms, were not only regularly practiced, they were quite common among all classes (Ian Dowbiggin N. pag.). Hippocrates developed The Hippocratic Oath at around 300 B.C. and included the passage that physicians should not perform EAS even when asked. It took until the Christian movement for this to become the preferred method for practicing medicine. Euthanasia and physician assisted death are becoming more accepted in modern times, once again.

A controversial practice that invokes a debate over how beneficial its intentions are is the use of euthanasia. The argument switches between whether or not putting terminally ill patients to death with the assistance of a physician is justifiable and right. Legalizing the practice of euthanasia is a significant topic among many people in society, including doctors and nurses in the medical field, as it forces people to decide where to draw the line between relieving pain and simply killing. While some people see euthanasia as a way to helping a patient by eliminating their pain, it is completely rejected by others who see it as a method of killing.

Euthanasia, also known as assisted suicide, is the act of permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured patients. This is never suggested by the caretaker rather than requested by the patient or their family. Few areas such as the Netherlands have already legalized this practice. This debate, as split as a fork in the road, is over whether or not this approach should be legalized worldwide on stances regarding religion, ethics, and self choice.     I see this as being extremely unethical on both religious and social morality levels.

Everyone’s view of euthanasia is different. Some think it is best for what the patients want and give them that, others have their religious values to speak out against assisted death. Religions like Christianity and Catholics believe that assisted suicide violates the sanctity of life. The Mormon communities believe “Euthanasia is condemned. Anyone who takes part in euthanasia, including assisted suicide, is regarded as having violated the commandments of God” (Religion and Spirituality 1).

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.

THE EUTHANASIA CONTROVERSY Summary Euthanasia has constantly been a heated debate amongst commentators, such as the likes of legal academics, medical practitioners and legislators for many years. Hence, the task of this essay is to discuss the different faces minted on both sides of the coin – should physicians and/or loved ones have the right to participate in active euthanasia? In order to do so, the essay will need to explore the arguments for and against legalizing euthanasia, specifically active euthanasia and subsequently provide a stand on whether or not it should be an accepted practice.

The act of euthanasia, whether active or passive, is heavily obstructed in the medical field. Through medical ethics, the act of passive euthanasia is condoned by withholding treatment and thus, allowing the patient to die. Without any direct contact with the patient, the doctor is not considered as the cause of death. Thus, the medical field views passive euthanasia as of lesser and more permissible value in comparison to active euthanasia. In the statement made by the House of Delegates of the American Medical Association, they perceive this as contrary to mercy killing, as it is, the cessation of the employment of extraordinary means to prolong the life of the body when there is irrefutable evidence that biological death is imminent is the decision of the patient and/or his immediate family.

Plato wrote “Mentally and physically ill persons should be left to death, they do not have the right to live”(A General History of Euthanasia, (n.d.) p.1 ) Sir Thomas More was the first prominent Christian to mention euthanasia in his book Utopia. Then, in the 18th century, Prussia passed a law that reduced the punishment of a person who killed a patient with an incurable disease. In the 20th century, euthanasia became a heated topic among numerous individuals, who

Euthanasia is the end of a person that was suffering from an illness or a traumatic accident in the past that has affected them and changed them to a different person. Most of these people find them self to believe they are a nuisance to others such as family members or some care givers. Euthanasia is the process of end a live of someone in great suffering to relive the pain of whatever caused it in the first place. Euthanasia is one of the most controversial topics because of religious purposes or the choice of choosing a sooner death.      Euthanasia is legal in very limited parts of the world.

Many of the people who are against euthanasia have Christian views which make euthanasia wrong. There are many scriptures in the bible that will back up the view of those Christians opposed to euthanasia. One scripture says, “There is a time for everything, and a season for every activity under the heavens: a time to be born and a time to die, a time to plant and a time to uproot (Ecclesiastes 3:1-2, New International Version). With the bible full of other scriptures to make the case of a Christian, there is plenty to see why being opposed to euthanasia is a no