Euthanasia
A doctor kills a patient because they were paid off to do so. This may strike up some complications, right? If euthanasia were legal, maybe it would just be overlooked. Someone who is murdered could get no justice if law protects the murderer. To prove that a doctor wasn’t supposed to give their dying patient a lethal dose of medicine may be hard. The consequence of murder could appear with euthanasia becoming legal; yes the terminally ill patients could be helped, but euthanasia should stay illegal for the possible complications.
Euthanasia is a positive thing according to Jack Kevorkian, also known as Doctor Death. He thought patients’ bodies could be used to gain scientific knowledge, or in his words “scientific gain at it’s finest.” According to Michael Betzold, Kevorkian quoted, “Helping suffering or doomed patients kill themselves is merely the first step… what I find most satisfying is the prospect of making possible the performance of invaluable experiments.” Kevorkian wants a society where euthanasia is both legal and ethical for those who need it. He thought that it would be beneficial for patients who wanted to die. Many reports; however, show that Kevorkian was more into the experiments performed after the patients’ deaths. Euthanasia is a positive thing to Jack Kevorkian since advancements in science could be made.
Alternatives to euthanasia are offered to patients before euthanasia is. Euthanasia is illegal in most places so it is rarely a choice for patients. What I mean by this is, hospice and palliative care are both legal and good services available to those coming into their last six months of life (Euthanasia Legal). Both hospice and palliative care can be specialized to a patient’s needs. Place...
... middle of paper ...
... didn’t die at all.
Overall there are few positives for why euthanasia should be legal. With all the complications that could arise with euthanasia being legalized, it’d be nearly impossible for it to be an act for the better. Yes, it could help the terminally ill, but there are also many downfalls. Terminally ill have other options for the end of their life. In the future if euthanasia doesn’t legalize, improvements in other options could be made.
Works Cited
Betzold, Michael. “How Jack Kevorkian Became a National Hero.” New Republic. eLibrary, 26 May 1997. Web. 29 Oct. 2013.
Hendin, Herbert MD., Foley, Kathleen MD. “Physician-Assisted Suicide in Oregon: A Medical Perspective.” Issues in Law & Medicine 2(2008): 121. eLibrary, n.d. Web. 29 Oct. 2013.
“Should Euthanasia or Physician-Assisted Suicide be Legal?” ProCon.org. 13 Mar. 2009. Web. 28 Oct. 2013.
Currently, Oregon is the only state that has legalized assisted suicide. The Oregon statute, which came into e...
In 1994, Oregon passed the Death with Dignity Act. This law states that Oregon residents, who have been diagnosed with a life ending disease and have less than six months to live, may obtain a lethal medicine prescribed by a physician, which would end their life when and where they chose to do so. This law or act requires the collection of data from patients and physicians and publishes it in an annual r...
The term Euthanasia is derived from the Greek roots, taking the words ‘eu’, meaning good or well, and ‘thanatos’, meaning death, to create the term “good death ”. (Definition of Euthanasia . 2011) The term ‘Euthanasia’ is not defined specifically within Australian Legislation, however the generalised definition states that Euthanasia is intentionally taking another person’s life by the means of a direct action or depriving a person of the medical care needed to preserve life. (Euthanasia: What Does It Really Mean? Date Unknown). Linda Jackson (2005) continues to add that Euthanasia can then be further separated into four specified categories: Passive voluntary euthanasia, active voluntary euthanasia, passive involuntary euthanasia and active involuntary euthanasia. Voluntary Euthanasia will be the specified area that will be focused on within this assignment.
Dr. Kevorkian was seen differently by many people. Some people thought that he was a good person while other people saw him as a criminal for helping people end their life. Due to his actions many laws have been created against assisted suicide. Even though he was charged with murders and for breaking the law he still kept on helping people. This showed that he cared a lot about his patients. The Kevorkian that started as a quiet religious child grew up to be a highly debatable person.
Euthanasia is a difficult ideal to understand, to lack the ability to place a value on someone’s life and to understand someone’s suffering at the sometime. Being pulled by both your heart and your soul at the same time.
In conclusion, all should firmly believe that physician assisted suicide should not be legalized in any state. Although it is legalized in Oregon it is not wise for any other state to follow that example. By now, all should strongly believe the growing public support for PAS still remains a very dangerous trend. The role of our physician is that of a healer, not a killer. It must be understood that in some cases the only way to relieve someone from their pain is to let them go. On the contrary, each human life has an
In current society, legalizing physician assisted suicide is a prevalent argument. In 1997, the Supreme Court recognized no federal constitutional right to physician assisted suicide (Harned 1) , which defines suicide as one receiving help from a physician by means of a lethal dosage (Pearson 1), leaving it up to state legislatures to legalize such practice if desired. Only Oregon and Washington have since legalized physician assisted suicide. People seeking assisted suicide often experience slanted judgments and are generally not mentally healthy. Legalization of this practice would enable people to fall victim to coercion by friends and family to commit suicide. Also, asking for death is unfair to a doctor’s personal dogma. Some argue that society should honor the freedom of one’s choice to take his own life with the assistance of a physician; however, given the reasoning provided, it is in society’s best interest that physician assisted suicide remain illegal. Physician assisted suicide should not be legalized because suicidal people experience distorted judgments resulting in not being mentally equipped to make such a decision, people who feel they are a burden to their family may choose death as a result, and physicians should not have to go against their personal doctrines and promises.
Those against it are equally worried about the victim’s situation in where their lives are taken away without their consent and at the same time, the possibility of a recovery. However, just because something is not accepted by society does not mean it is wrong, as the pro side of involuntary Euthanasia mentions, it would end with the victims’ pain by giving them a peaceful death. The reason to keep someone alive is to give him/her a new opportunity to fight for an improvement, if there no such thing the best option, although the hardest too, is to let the person rest in a better place, the positive fact about practicing Euthanasia is that the organs of the victim will save a life. On the other hand, a good effect of keeping someone alive is that the family will still see their loved one. Besides, they will save many legal problems because of Euthanasia still illegal in many countries. Both sides can agree that their cases in where their beliefs do not fit, as an example for the ones that support involuntary Euthanasia, if there a possibility to a recover they cannot kill the patient, they must keep him/her alive until the doctors said something different. In comparison, an exception for the con side that does not support involuntary
Schneider Keith, “DR. Jack Kevorkian Dies at 83; A Doctor who helped End Lives”. The New York Times. Arthur Sulzberger Jr. 3, June 2011. Online Newspaper 2014
For example, if a person is in a coma and the family believes that they will not revive, then the family should allow the patient to die because the patient is basically dead already. Furthermore, if someone is in really bad pain, then they should be able to choose euthanasia because they are suffering a lot. They might not want to die because they acknowledge it would make their family member sad, but on the other hand they are hurting and can only think about is the pain. That is when I strongly agree with Hooker that people should be able to choose euthanasia and that being euthanised is for the best. In my opinion, having a law permitting euthanasia is good because it means that the person can take control of their own life. It would be up to them whether they want to be euthanised or not, in both good and bad conditions. Just having the option can be beneficial to some because it is like having the freedom to choose to live or die. Therefore, If I was sick, I would like to have a law that permits me to choose euthanasia, because I could decide whether it is the best decision for me or
"Legalized Physician-Assisted Suicide in Oregon ñ The Second Year." Amy D. Sullivan, Katrina Hedberg, David W. Fleming. The New England Journal of Medicine. February 24, 2000. v.342, n.8
Doctors prefer to never have to euthanize a patient. It is a contradiction of everything they have been taught for a doctor to euthanize someone, because a doctor’s job is to do everything in their power to keep the patient alive, not assist them in suicide. The majority of doctors who specialize in palliative care, a field focused on quality of life for patients with severe and terminal illnesses, think legalizing assisted suicide is very unnecessary. This is due to the fact that if patients do not kill themselves, they will end up dying on a ventilator in the hospital under the best possible care available, with people around them trying to keep them as comfortable as possible. Legalized euthanasia everywhere has been compared to going down a slippery slope. Officials believe that it could be done over excessively and the fear of assisted suicide numbers rising greatly is a great fear. This is why euthanasia is such a controversial subject worldwide. But, even though it is a very controversial subject, euthanasia is humane. Every doctor also has a say in whether or not they choose to euthanize a patient or not, leaving only the doctors who are willing to do this type of practice, for euthanizing patients. Medicine and drugs prescribed by a doctor for pain or suffering can not always help a person to the extent they desire, even with the help of doctors
In 1997, Oregon became the only state allowing legal physician-assisted suicide (PAS). Although physician-assisted suicide has been legal in Oregon for four years, it remains highly controversial. PAS is when a doctor prescribes their patient to medication which would kill them. Patients must pass certain requirements in order to request a prescription for lethal medication. The patient must be 18 years or older, a resident of Oregon, able to make health care decisions, and diagnosed with a terminal illness that would lead to death within six months. After meeting these requirements patients are able to request a prescription for lethal medication from a licensed Oregon physician. To receive a prescription for lethal medication, the following steps must be completed:
First of all, euthanasia saves money and resources. The amount of money for health care in each country, and the number of beds and doctors in each hospital are limited. It is a huge waste if we use those money and resources to lengthen the lives of those who have an incurable disease and want to die themselves rather than saving the lives of the ones with a curable ailment. When we put those patients who ask for euthanasia to death, then the waiting list for each hospital will shorten. Then, the health care money of each country, the hospital beds, and the energy of the doctors can be used on the ones who can be cured, and can get back to normal and able to continue contributing to the society. Isn’t this a better way of using money and resources rather than unnaturally extend those incurable people’s lives?
People believe physicians should be able to aid in this process because they have valuable knowledge on how the body works, “… knowledge that can be used to kill or to cure” (Callahan 74). This argument contradicts the moral meaning of medicine. Indeed, the word "medical" comes from the Latin word “mederi,” which means "to heal." Medicine is understood to heal, cure, or comfort people, not kill. As a matter of fact, in the International Medical Code of Ethics and the American Nurses Association’s Code of Ethics fully states that the act of euthanasia violates their role and shall not be performed. Just because of the mere fact that physicians have the knowledge and medical equipment to kill does not indicate a physician should be permitted to perform euthanasia. Dan Brock states, “… permitting physicians to perform euthanasia, it is said, would be incompatible with their fundamental moral and professional commitment as healers to care for patients and to protect life” (77). Dan Brock also raises the question, if euthanasia became a common practice that was performed by physicians, would we eventually fear or lose trust in our physicians?