Euthanasia is the act of intentionally ending a life to relieve pain and suffering. The House of Lords Select Committee on Medical Ethics of England defines euthanasia as a deliberate intervention undertaken with the intention of ending a life, to relieve suffering(Harris, NM. 2001)., in the Netherlands euthanasia is defined as the termination of life by a doctor at the request of a patient(BBC,2011).
The right to die debate posses a great number of legal, moral and ethical issues. Proponents and supporters of euthanasia had presented valid arguments: people have the right of self-determination and that is why they should be allowed to choose their own fate; is a better choice to assist an individual to die than obligate him/her to continue suffering; there is not significant difference between passive euthanasia which is often permitted and active euthanasia which is not permitted and allowing the practice of euthanasia will not necessarily lead to undesirable consequences.
Autonomy is philosophical and psychological concept that expresses the capacity of a person to adopt norms without external influence or pressures. The principle of autonomy is essential and should be respected as a norm. In a medical scope, an Informed Consent is the maximum expression of the principle of autonomy and should represent the patients right and a medical obligation, because the patient’s preferences and values should be the priority from an ethical point of view. The medical objective should be respect this autonomy, because is about the patients health. The decisions made by an adult patient who is mental competent and posses sufficient information about this matter, should be ethically unbreakable. (Fundacion pro-derecho a morir dignamente,...
... middle of paper ...
...ns, but values, religious believes and even legislation, may seem irrelevant when a beloved person life’s is devastated by a terminal illness or permanent injuries that took away the joy of life and the only thing left is the suffering reflecting in his/her eyes.
Works Cited
Madonna, K. (2010). Debate your right to die or prepare to suffer. Courier Mail, The (Brisbane), 24. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Fundacion pro-derecho a morir dignamente. The right federation of right to die societies (2001). Retrieved august 4, 2011, from DMD: http://www.dmd.org.co/autonomia.html
The American Civil Liberties Union ( 1996)
Harris, N (2001) The Euthanasia Debate. J.R Army Med Corps 147 (3): 367-70 PMID 11766225
Jenkins, J (2011) Euthanasia and assisted Suicide, BBC, Retreived, August 4, 2011, from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/support/terminalillness_euthanasia.shtml
Euthanasia and assisted suicide is known as a process in which an individual (sick or disabled) engages in an act that leads to his or her own death with the help of physicians or family members to end pain and suffering. There are several other terms used for this process, such as active euthanasia or passive euthanasia. Active euthanasia refers to what is being done to actively end life while passive euthanasia is referred as eliminating a treatment that will prolong a patient’s life, which will eventually lead to death (Levy et al., 2103, p. 402). Euthanasia and assisted suicide pose a significant ethical issue today, and understanding the issue requires examining the different principles, such as the ethical issue, professional code of conduct, strength and limitations, autonomy and informed consent, beneficence and nonmaleficence, distribution, and confidentiality and truthfulness.
This character brings some of the issues to light. Works Cited The “Euthanasia.” Discovering Collection. Web. The Web.
Bernards, Neal, Ed. (1989). Euthanasia: Opposing Viewpoints. Opposing Viewpoints Series, Series Eds. David L. Bender and Bruno Leone. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven Press.
Euthanasia - Pro and Con & nbsp; Abstract & nbsp; This paper will define Euthanasia and assisted suicide. Euthanasia is often confused with and associated with assisted suicide, definitions of the two are. required. Two perspectives shall be presented in this paper. The first perspective favor euthanasia or the "right to die," the second perspective. favor antieuthanasia, or the "right to live". Each perspective shall. endeavor to clarify the legal, moral and ethical ramifications or aspects of euthanasia. & nbsp; Thesis Statement & nbsp; Euthanasia, also mercy killing, is the practice of ending a life so as to.
Euthanasia – the ending of a terminally ill patient’s life by a third party, normally a physician, to end the pain and suffering of the patient.
Today's society is now introduced to one of the most controversial issues; assisted suicide. Just like in other controversial arguments, there are many people that feel that it is wrong for people to ask their healthcare provider to end one's life; while others feel that if the person is terminally ill and has given their will to die, that they can be assisted in suicide. Though both sides are reasonable many people believe that people should not take part in helping someone take their own life, assisted suicide should be legal because, it plays a factor of conquering one’s feelings, gives an option to those whom are terminally ill or in immense pain, and every human
The euthanasia debate raises many questions. Questions such as: who is the one benefited by the murder? Or should we allow family members to make a life-or-death decision over a loved one who may never have expressed a desire to die, simply because they could not say with words a will to live? If a person should be suffering with an illness of which there seems no hope of r...
There are two methods of carrying out euthanasia, the first one is active and the second one is passive. Active euthanasia means the physicians deliberately take actions which cause the death of the patients, for example, the injection of sedatives in excess amount. Passive euthanasia is that the doctors do not take any further therapies to keep the ill patients alive such as switching off the life supporting machines [1]. This essay argues that the legalization of the euthanasia should not be proposed nowadays. It begins by analyzing the problem that may cause in relation to the following aspects: ‘slippery slope’ argument, religious view, vulnerable people and a rebuttal against the fair distribution of medical resources. This essay concludes that the legalization of the voluntary euthanasia brings more harm than good.
whilst, euthanasia is defined as; an intentional means of causing the death of a person, the motive being to benefit that person or protect him/her from further suffering.
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.
middle of paper ... ... I believe that for the sake of ‘B’, we come together, and finally pull the plug on this debate. Works Cited Ball, Howard. At Liberty to Die: The Battle for Death with Dignity in America.
Singer, Peter. "Freedom and the Right to Die." Online Opinion. 2002: p.1-3. Online. Internet. http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/2002/May02/Singer.htm. (28 Sept 2003).
Robert Matz; Daniel P. Sudmasy; Edward D. Pallegrino. "Euthanasia: Morals and Ethics." Archives of Internal Medicine 1999: p1815 Aug. 9, 1999 .
...ncluding the right to participate in assisted suicide. There are many issues concerning euthanasia, however, the three main issues that I feel are important when discussing the legalization of euthanasia are because of medical advances, the severity of pain a person is in once diagnosed with a terminal illness, and the basic fact that a person’s life is their own life and no one else’s. A physician should be allowed to participate in a patient’s death in a compassionate, confidential manner. A physician can provide the most peaceful, least painful and effective means to die. No human being should have to suffer with a terminal illness when an alternate course of action is available, such as euthanasia. No person has the right to take away a freedom given to another without just cause; therefore, who is to say that we cannot pursue the benefits of euthanasia.
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.