Beeeeeep. The heart monitor flatlined as the pancreatic cancer patient was injected with serum by the nurse. Through a painless procedure, his suffering was permanently ended. However, the precious life of this individual was also permanently ended due the use of one controversial technology: euthanasia. Mary Shelley, author of Frankenstein, takes a stance against such advancements; she chooses to compare technology to a monster because of the way it corrupts society. The use of Euthanasia relates directly to Shelley’s view of technology; in the discussion surrounding both topics, technological advancement is discouraged due to the major implications that it places on society and the user itself.
As seen in Frankenstein, Shelley fears
…show more content…
In terms of the effects that euthanization has society, there are many benefits. The most beneficial aspect of this technology is that it is comforting for family and friends to know that their loved one is no longer suffering from intolerable pain. Although euthanasia is used for all ages, parents have specifically spoken out by saying that “the best parents are the ones who let their children go” (Braw). In today’s society, instant gratification is a priority; people will go to any extent to make a loved one to get what he or she wants. The nature of today’s society is to view an immediate death as an instant resolution to life’s problems. This concept is specifically demonstrated in Belgium; euthanization acts as a way to not only put patients out of their misery but also “to maintain the right population balance” (Frederich). Scholars idealize Belgium as a model for future societies because it has proven to be successful; Euthanasia will likely be used to control the population of overpopulated …show more content…
Societies frequently reject the use of euthanasia because of the way in which it violates ethics. This is a major concern in the field of religion; along with other religions and religious leaders, Willem Velema of the Orthodox Protestant Church was “fiercely opposed” to the idea of euthanizing (Boer). From a religious standpoint, this procedure is wrong because patients and their families can act as God by determining time of death. Religion teaches that God keeps His children on the earth for a reason. After all, God puts certain obstacles in one’s life in order to make them stronger; resorting to death is a sign of weakness. Euthanasia is also opposed by many because of the way people take advantage of it. In Belgium, where Euthanization is legal, the number of medically induced deaths “has been going up” tremendously (Boer). In fact, “it has increased by an average of 15% a year” since 2006 (Boer). As numbers increase, citizens become desensitized to the idea, therefore, viewing it as a viable option in the face of pain.
Although not as common, patients will reject euthanasia if it is an option. Obvious reasons include ethics and religious beliefs. Patients also decline euthanasia by holding on to one concept: hope. There is always a chance that a medical miracle will occur or that the doctor’s statement was incorrect. Observations
It is scientifically proven, that people prefer attractive people. Appearances help millions of good-looking men and women across the country advance in their careers, get free drinks, and receive more opportunity. But, Mary Shelley juxtaposes the physical deterioration of Victor as her novel, Frankenstein, progresses and the creature ’s ugly physical appearance and the motif of clouds juxtapose with birds to argue that appearances may be deceptive. She argues through the juxtaposition of Victor and the creation’s death that ultimately it is through death, one of nature’s devices, that allows us to see the character of a person.
There have been numerous debates all around the globe as to whether or not the practice of euthanasia is ethical or unethical. People who are in pain and suffering are more likely to be pro-euthanasia. Those who never have to feel that level of pain and suffering that would drive a person to want to end their lives could never understand a person’s reason for considering this option. Fictional characters are used to express human suffering such as those found in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. There are several modern themes such as genetic engineering, cloning, the treatment of outcast and playing God highlighted in Shelley’s book, however the focus of this paper is on the less common theme of euthanasia involving the main character Dr. Victor Frankenstein.
The word “euthanasia” comes from the Greek words “eu” meaning good or well and “thanatos” meaning death. Euthanasia means to take a deliberate action with the express intent of ending a life in order to relieve intractable suffering. Belgium has passed a law that allows euthanasia for terminally ill children experiencing “constant and unbearable suffering” who can show a “capacity of discernment”. This has sparked many debates about whether child euthanasia is moral and whether it should be legal or not. Although child euthanasia is a way for a child to escape “constant and unbearable” suffering or to avoid suffering through a terminal illness, child euthanasia should not be legal because children do not possess the mental capacity to make a request for such an irreversible decision, a child may choose to die because they fear that they are burdening others, and the requirements in place to request euthanasia may not be sufficient enough to protect against misuse.
Mary Shelley's Frankenstein is filled with death and sorrow. They occur in almost every aspect of the book. The four "squares" of the book, Walter, Victor, the monster, and the cottagers, all suffer from them at one time or another. Some perceive Frankenstein as a horror story; however, in actuality it is a book of tragedy and despair. Every page reveals more misery than the page before. Thus, death and sorrow are inevitable in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein.
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).
With the advancement of technology and science, we are now able to genetically modify animals. Mary Shelley found a way to make science an epitome, and confirms what could happen if science is taken too far. In conclusion, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is considered to be a historical novel, based on scientific advancements. In this novel Shelley depicts her own definition of human nature, by showing the creature and the ways that humans react to him. The novel also showed the differences between morality and science.
Our modern world is full of diseases that are often incurable, making people’s life a living torment, stealing the sense of living and encouraging a person to give up on everything. Even though the medical advances that are offered today are being developed to save a patient’s life or relieve their pain they fail to do so. There is a controversy between two groups those who believe euthanasia should be allowed and those who strongly believe it should be prohibited. Those against euthanasia see a doctor who performs it as a murderer, their believe’s foundation is that there is nobody else other than god who should end a life. ““eu” means good and “thanathous” means death” (Boudreau, et al. 2) Physicians should be allowed by law to prescribe
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, a truly famous novel that has been revisited by many, as well as revised by the author in the many years since its original publication. Within this novel Shelley conveys the tragic fictional story of Victor Frankenstein and his monster that he thoughtlessly brought to life, as well as the lives of those affected by his hideous creation. Throughout the novel it is made quite apparent that the monster was not inherently evil, in fact the monster was quite benign, however through its interactions with society the monster is slowly shaped into a being that can truly be called just that, a monster. All of the aforementioned change to the monster are brought about in part by the societal standards of the time period
Mary Shelley's novel Frankenstein cannot merely be read as a literary work of the early 19th century. It represents the workings of young Shelley's mind. Further, it represents the vast scientific discoveries of the time, combined with Mary Shelley's intuitive perception of science. She views science as a powerful entity, but also recognizes the dangers if uncontrolled. Shelley demonstrates this fear in the book as science drives Victor Frankenstein to create his monster. In the end, it is also his use of science that inevitably becomes his demise.
In this essay, I will discuss whether euthanasia is morally permissible or not. Euthanasia is the intention of ending life due to inevitable pain and suffering. The word euthanasia comes from the Greek words “eu,” which means good, and “thanatosis, which means death. There are two types of euthanasia, active and passive. Active euthanasia is when medical professionals deliberately do something that causes the patient to die, such as giving lethal injections. Passive euthanasia is when a patient dies because the medical professionals do not do anything to keep them alive or they stop doing something that was keeping them alive. Some pros of euthanasia is the freedom to decide your destiny, ending the pain, and to die with dignity. Some cons
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 patient might not be in the state of mind where they can make a clear and sensible decision. Some things that cause people to come to an unreasonable conclusion are mental complications, such as depression. Depression can lead to individuals wanting to commit suicide because they feel hopeless. If these individuals are seen as fit to make a life changing decision, they could take advantage of the availability of euthanasia. In addition, bias from the patient’s doctor could also persuade the patient to choose euthanasia, since the only source of medical information is from their doctor. The European Scientific Journal states that “ Recent studies have reported that about 70% of actual decisions to end a life by euthanasia have been hasty and irrational, and contrary to general perceptions, depression and loneliness rather than pain and suffering seem to be the primary factors motivating patients' interest in euthanasia. Also patients can be strongly influenced by doctors as the sole source of their information about illness, prognosis and possible interventions, so despair can easily be communicated to both the patient and family by a doctor expressing pessimism about a prognosis.” Therefore, euthanasia should not be legalized because of both mental complications and doctor bias.
Euthanasia is the medical practice of ending one’s life in order to preserve their dignity and relieve extreme pain when quality of life is low. There are several methods of euthanasia of which people choose from. These methods include active, passive, voluntary, involuntary, indirect and assisted euthanasia. As of now, only a few countries have legalized euthanasia. The countries most known for the legalization of it are Belgium, Switzerland, and the Netherlands. In a recent news article titled “Why I Support Assisted Dying”, a Canadian poll revealed that 26 % of physicians would be willing to actually participate in assisted dying and that if euthanasia were legalized, more and more medical professionals would agree with it (Morris, 2013). In this specific article, there is some light shed on the issue in comparison to others which often put a negative spin on the issue. In instances where palliative care is not enough, physician assisted euthanasia is proposed by the article. Due to many of the negative stigmas attached to the matter at hand, many see euthanasia as a social problem which should not be carried out. However, there are plenty of reasons to rectify such attitudes. From a sociological perspective, a functionalist would argue that euthanasia should not be a social issue and should be legalized. Euthanasia is an alternative anyone should have the right to exercise to end one’s own suffering, maintain dignity and pride until the very end, and to free up medical funds that could be used towards saving other lives.
More than likely, a good majority of people have heard about euthanasia at least once in their lifetime. For those out there who have been living under a rock their entire lives, euthanasia “is generally understood to mean the bringing about of a good death – ‘mercy killing’, where one person, ‘A’, ends the life of another person, ‘B’, for the sake of ‘B’.” (Kuhse 294). There are people who believe this is a completely logical scenario that should be allowed, and there are others that oppose this view. For the purpose of this essay, I will be defending those who are suffering from euthanasia.
Should an individual be allowed to choose assisted suicide with the help of a physician, or be forced to follow their theological beliefs of the dominant religion they practice when life seems pointless? The choice of whether to live or not live is directly influenced by the decision to indulge in a process characterized as “physician assisted suicide” or simply called Euthanasia. Many people believe it is solely left upon God to determine when death should occur, but some people believe that a doctor has the right to take their life and help the patient destroy it. In this paper I will be discussing what euthanasia is, how it affects the patients life, and the implication it has on the religious community as an unmoral act.