The Pros And Cons Of Euthanasia

1064 Words3 Pages

Euthanasia is defined as “the act or practice of painlessly putting to death persons suffering from incurable and distressing disease as an act of mercy” (Paola). The goal of this action is therefore not maleficent, such is murder, but instead compassionate. However, euthanasia in the terms of physician assisted suicide (PAS) is still illegal in United States as it is deemed a form of wrongful homicide. One of the most likely reasons PAS is illegal in the United States, with the exception of in Oregon and Washington, is because it is both morally and ethically controversial.
When it comes to the topic of euthanasia the four ethical goals of health care providers are in direct conflict with one another. An argument can be made that both permitting and preventing euthanasia violates one of those four principles which are as follows: beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice. Perhaps the biggest conflict is between the principles of autonomy and non-maleficence. When it comes to PAS we cannot allow our patients to act autonomously while at the same time making sure to do no harm. In addition the Hippocratic Oath serves as a large roadblock on the way to legalizing PAS. The Hippocratic Oath is an oath taken by healthcare providers at the beginning of practice outlining obligations and proper conduct of providers. The Hippocratic Oath is based on the maxim “do no harm” and more specifically it states “neither will I administer a poison to anybody when asked to do so, nor will I suggest such a course”. American medicine traditionally succumbs to this oath and has therefore made PAS illegal. It is important to note, however, that this Oath was written thousands of years ago and it may need to be revised in the face of both e...

... middle of paper ...

...omy is in direct contrast with the medical maxim “do not harm” I have to disagree. The principle of non-maleficence does not simply state “do not kill” but it also states “do not cause pain or suffering”. For some the decision to die is less painful than to continue to live. Legalizing PAS in my eyes would equip individuals with the greatest amount of autonomy possible, which is choosing to end your life on your own terms. When we are forced to suffer through a terminal illness and let our lives end out of our control we are striped of all autonomy. Allowing individuals to make this decision consciously and voluntarily would instead allow us to regain an empowering sense of autonomy in our last moments of life. Instead of forcing these patients to continue a life they do not wish to live we can refocus healthcare resources on those who both need and want the help.

Open Document