Abstract Euthanasia is a long debated topic, going back for decades in our country alone. Both sides of the topic have valid points morally and ethically. The Netherlands have had euthanasia laws in effect since 1973. America has very few states with legislation on the books: Oregon enacted in 1997, Washington 2008. Germany experimented with Active Euthanasia in the 1930’s, resulting in one of the most horrendous genocides in the past millennium. No where else do we have a cohort more at risk than the elderly, as they fall prey to the pressures of getting out of the way, and with a burgeoning population of baby boomers now becoming the elderly our system already strained now faces even more pressure. Even though there is a widespread acceptance of euthanasia for the terminally ill in the Netherlands, Debate about who has the right to the procedure and how it should be controlled is far from over. (Sunny, Bloyd, 1995) Introduction The purpose of this paper is to briefly explore euthanasia with its different definitions, and to explore whether or not active euthanasia should be practiced in our, hospitals, and nursing homes and on the elderly. In a survey of 168 frail elderly patients at Dukes geriatric treatment clinic, researchers found that 39.9% favored physician assisted suicide for the terminally ill. 59.3% of the patients’ relatives 146 spouses, children, and siblings favored the same measure under the same circumstance, says Harold Koenig lead investigator of the study published in the October issue of Archives of Internal Medicine. Duke University Alumni Magazine, (Mar. 2008) Euthanasia: Greek for the good death. Euthanize: To kill a person or animal that is in a terminal condition with a great deal o... ... middle of paper ... ...es Not Increase The Severity of Depression Among Family Members Study Finds. Science Daily.com Oregon Health and Science University did a study about how a patient who has terminated their life is not subjecting their family to anymore depression than one who dies naturally, even suggesting that the family members feel relief that the patient is not suffering anymore. Difference of Opinion (Mar. 2008). Duke University Alumni Magazine, retrieved 2/21/2010. Probably the most up to date study of the elderly and their families opinion on euthanasia, in this case physician assisted suicide. Dr. Koenig undertook this research because he felt that there was a lack of data on how the elderly feel on this subject. The study goes on to state that over 60% of adults surveyed approve of physician assisted suicide, however they are younger and healthy
In short, euthanasia asks questions that cannot be answered from the perspective of medicine alone. The inappropriateness between assisting voluntary death and the professional ethos of physicians may mean that physicians should not assist death, except it does not necessarily settle the argument of whether anyone ever should. Acceptance for palliative care seems to be growing, but support of assisted suicide is growing also, because end of life issues are kept in the public eye. Additional empirical analysis of this situation is important. Furthermore, this debate could continue to yield insights into the issues around suffering at the end of life.
Euthanasia is divided into two separate classifications consisting of passive euthanasia and active euthanasia. Traditionally, “euthanasia is passive when a physician allows her patient to die, by withholding or withdrawing vital treatment from him…euthanasia is active when a patient's death results from his physician's killing the patient, typically by administering lethal medication” (Varelius, 2016). While active euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide share many of the same characteristics, they differ in the role for committing the final act, resulting in the death of the patient. A third party, consisting of either a family member or the physician, is responsible for “pulling-the-plug” in active euthanasia. On the other hand, in physician-assisted suicide, it is ultimately up to the patient to commit the final death-inducing act. Varelius suggests that the separation of passive and active euthanasia can be explained by the involvement that the physician partakes in their patients’ death
The issue at hand is whether physician-assisted suicide should be legalized for patients who are terminally ill and/or enduring prolonged suffering. In this debate, the choice of terms is central. The most common term, euthanasia, comes from the Greek words meaning "good death." Sidney Hook calls it "voluntary euthanasia," and Daniel C. Maguire calls it "death by choice," but John Leo calls it "cozy little homicides." Eileen Doyle points out the dangers of a popular term, "quality-of-life." The choice of terms may serve to conceal, or to enhance, the basic fact that euthanasia ends a human life. Different authors choose different terms, depending on which side of the issue they are defending.
This essay leaves no rock unturned in its analysis of the debate involving euthanasia and assisted suicide. Very thorough definitions are given for both concepts - with examples that clarify rather than obscure the reader's understanding.
Marker and Hamlon. “Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide: Frequently Asked Questions.” International Task Force. 2009. .
In today’s modern society the use of euthanasia and assisted suicide is a hot button topic. Due to the argumentative nature of this issue many philosophers have created their own ideas on how euthanasia and assisted suicide benefit or harm society. These philosophers such as Brock and Callahan differ in their arguments about euthanasia and assisted suicide. Like almost all the heavily opinionated topics in society there should be limits to the use thus my consensus regarding euthanasia and assisted suicide is that it should be legalized to a certain extent.
Regarding the views of physicians on euthanasia and assisted suicide, it is difficult to get a true picture of physicians views from articles in newspapers or from journal review articles. Since euthanasia and assisted suicide are new and a challenge to established values, a report about a single physician practicing assisted suicide is more likely to get published than a report that members of a large physicians' organization reaffirms traditional values. Physicians that practice euthanasia and assisted suicide have been more outspoken and vociferous since many consider themselves as pioneers. Whereas many physicians who continue to practice with traditional ethics, see no need to advertise this fact. Even if one reads consensus statements from medical ethics groups one may get a biased idea of the mainstream views of physicians. These statements are usually written by a small group of physicians, many of whom are active in ethics groups because they want to see change. Several articles have been published that poll doctors' views on euthanasia and assisted suicide, and these are likely to get closer to the real views of doctors. In a survey of doctors on management of the persistent vegetative state, 35% of doctors would never withdraw feeding or nutrition and 28% would always treat an acute infection or other life-threatening condition (1).
Should euthanasia be allowed or not? It has become a very controversial issue nowadays. Velleman and Hooker have different perspectives on euthanasia, and whether there should be laws permitting voluntary and non-voluntary euthanasia. Although there are well-reasoned arguments on both sides, I would strongly agree with Hooker's argument that there should be a law permitting voluntary euthanasia when it is for the wellbeing of the person and that each individual should be able to make their own decision.
In the article “Attitudes and Desires Related to Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide Among Terminally Ill Patients and their Caregivers” research was done to expose terminally ill patients and their caregiver’s views towards euthanasia and physician assisted suicide (Ezekiel et al., 2000). Surveying a sample of terminally ill patients, as well as their caregivers, twice a week from March 1996 until July 1997, provided enough data to evaluate (Ezekiel et al., 2000). The participants included a total of 988 terminally ill patients and 893 caregivers. The research was done to not only determine whether or not people support assisted suicide, but also to show how many patients had considered taking their own lives, and how man...
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.
Euthanasia is a serious political, moral and ethics issues in society. People either strictly forbid or firmly favor euthanasia. Terminally ill patients have a fatal disease from which they will never recover, many will never sleep in their own bed again. Many beg health professionals to “pull the plug” or smother them with a pillow so that they do not have to bear the pain of their disease so that they will die faster. Thomas D. Sullivan and James Rachels have very different views on the permissibility of active and passive euthanasia. Sullivan believes that it is impermissible for the doctor, or anyone else to terminate the life of a patient but, that it is permissible in some cases to cease the employment of “extraordinary means” of preserving
“Euthanasia is defined as a deliberate act undertaken by one person with the intention of ending life of another person to relieve that person's suffering and where the act is the cause of death.”(Gupta, Bhatnagar and Mishra) Some define it as mercy killing. Euthanasia may be voluntary, non voluntary and involuntary. When terminally ill patient consented to end his or her life, it is called voluntary euthanasia. Non voluntary euthanasia occurs when the suffering person never consented nor requested to end a life. These patients are incompetent to decide because they are either minor, in a comatose stage or have mental conditions. Involuntary euthanasia is conducted when it is against the will of the patient (Gupta, Bhatnagar, Mishra). Euthanasia can be either passive or active. Passive euthanasia means life-sustaining treatments are withheld and nothing is done to keep the patient alive. Active euthanasia occurs when a physician do something by giving drugs or substances that ends a patient’s life. (Medical News Today)
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.
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.
Euthanasia is one of the most recent and controversial debates today (Brogden, 2001). As per the Canadian Medical Association, euthanasia refers to the process of purposely and intentionally performing an act that is overtly anticipated to end the person’s life (CMA, 1998)