Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Issues of euthanasia
Arguement against euthanasia
The need for euthanasia
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Issues of euthanasia
Let's say a close relative of yours has been lying on their hospital bed with nothing by tubes attached on their body and a dying heart for the past few months. Today seems to be their last day, doctors tell you, and all you can do is watch as their life slowly dwindles. Isn't there something you would want to do about their suffering that you would like to end? Well, killing isn't one of them,yet hospitals even allow such action to happen on a patient. Who in their right mind would even think of killing someone vulnerable? Only someone with a rational mind would try and enforce the banning of such an action, especially in our country. The act that has been called as "mercy killing" named euthanasia should not be practiced (or even worse, legalized) in our country as it is a form of taboo against our Christian morals and practices, disobeying our bond with God as we promise to make our lives fulfilling, promotes the contagious idea of suicide to many fearful dying patients, and possible the worst, gives physicians, normal human beings, the right to kill another human being.
Firstly, as a Christian community, the practice of euthanasia in hospitals is an act against our morals and values since the process of someone dying is very significant in spiritual matters and should be best if it is not disturbed by human activity. As humans, we should all know that one's life and existence in this planet is one of the most valuable gift as we all posses and carry God's image and His distinct values. Looking more into this, humans posses a capacity that no other living being can do, and that is to make them see things in another perspective, using the complexity of their minds to develop abilities. Thus, a patient's life can't just end by ...
... middle of paper ...
...eedom of discussing such matters between doctor and patient. Together, we can help one other turn away from what's morally wrong and open up to better ways in dealing the last minutes of a dying loved one by accepting their condition with an open mind, despite a hectic situation.
II. Source for First Reason: http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/christianity/christianethics/euthanasia_1.shtml http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/euthanasia/against/against_1.shtml
III. Source for Second Reason: http://www.ccdonline.ca/en/humanrights/endoflife/euthanasia http://www.carenotkilling.org.uk/about/
IV. Source for Third Reason: http://www.starcourse.org/euthanasia.htm http://www.euthanasia.com/argumentsagainsteuthanasia.html
(2011, 07). Euthanasia Persuasive Speech. StudyMode.com. Retrieved 07, 2011, from http://www.studymode.com/essays/Euthanasia-Persuasive-Speech-729266.html
The history of physician-assisted suicide began to emerge since the ancient time. Historians and ancient philosophers especially had been debating over this issue. Thus, this issue is no longer new to us. However, it seems little vague because it has not yet been fully told. The historical story consists of patterns of thought, advocacy, and interpretation on whether to legalize assisted death. "Only until June, 1999, the United States Supreme Court issued decisions in two cases that claimed constitutional protection for physician-assisted suicide, Washington v. Glucksberg and Vacoo v. Quill, by a single 9-0 vote covering the case (Bartin, Rhodes, Silver, 1). They also say that this decision mark the beginning of long period debate, which will not be fully resolved (1). Hence, the debate began by professionals from different aspects, especially the physicians themselves.
First of all, we were not in charge of our birth, we had no input of when we wanted to be born, is only fair that we don’t decide our death. I believe God creates life, He and He alone should decide when and how a person should dye. Only when the time come. I think is unethical to kill someone just because their quality of life is not up to people’s standard. Who are we to decide who should live or die. God the creator creates, let him decide when a person should die. I promise you God does not need our health in that matter. Euthanasia is a serious topic; It goes against the standards of traditional medicine. First, doctors have to take the Hippocratic Oath to become a practicing physician. The Hippocratic Oath says do whatever you can to save people’s life, on the contrary, Euthanasia is basically just killing them if they want to die and avoid the suffering. Second, euthanasia is not always applied to terminally ill patients either. People who have been in serious accidents, or who have debilitating diseases often consider using euthanasia as a resolution to their suffering. I believe the act of euthanasia is against the principles of Beneficence, Non-maleficence, and Life Preservation. By virtue, Beneficence tells us to be good and be kind to others, also do things to benefits others, preventing people from harms or anything
“The most good is done by allowing people to carry out their own affairs with as little intrusion by government as possible” (Gittelman 372). Dying is a part of life and since it is your body you should have complete and full control over it. Euthanasia and physician assisted suicide should be available for patients because they have the right to choses there “final exit”(Manning 26). Patients shouldn’t have to experience the fear of being “trapped” on life support with “no control” (Manning 27). They should be permitted the opportunity to die with a sense of pride and dignity, not shame, pain and suffrage. To make anyone live longer against their will and is simply immoral. By denying patient the option of euthanasia and physician assisted suicide the government is vi...
article, is to explain to the physician’s about the certain steps and protocols that are
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.
...le pain to both the patient and to their families. One procedure, known as Physician-Assisted suicide, alleviates suffering by having a physician provide a patient the means to painlessly kill him or herself. This procedure however, remains controversial and illegal in many states. This is unfair to patients who wish to be assisted in seeking death and escaping their terminal illness. Despite all of the benefits that are brought about because of Physician-Assisted suicide, people across America still seek to ban the practice because it clashes with personal moral and ethical beliefs. Although many people disagree with the procedure of Physician-Assisted suicide, it should still become legal because it alleviates suffering, allows patients to die in a dignified manner, and allows people to take control of the ultimate choice, death, away from their terminal illness.
These and many other cases have occurred in medical history, and many more are bound to occur. This ending of the anguish is called euthanasia. In order for the ethical concerns of the issue to be discussed, euthanasia needs to be defined, and the different classes of it understood. The discussion itself has to be based on a method of reasoning and logic. One of the sources of ethical rationale, and probably the major method of reasoning in some parts of the world, is religion. Different religions differ in their view of euthanasia, some share similarities while others differ completely.
Physician assisted suicide (PAS) is a very important issue. It is also important tounderstand the terms and distinction between the varying degrees to which a person can be involved in hastening the death of a terminally ill individual. Euthanasia, a word that is often associated with physician assisted suicide, means the act or practice of killing for reasons of mercy. Assisted suicide takes place when a dying person who wishes to precipitate death, requests help in carrying out the act. In euthanasia, the dying patients may or may not be aware of what is happening to them and may or may not have requested to die. In an assisted suicide, the terminally ill person wants to die and has specifically asked for help. Physician-assisted suicide occurs when the individual assisting in the suicide is a doctor rather than a friend or family member. Because doctors are the people most familiar with their patients’ medical condition and have knowledge of and access to the necessary means to cause certain death, terminally ill patients who have made
Euthanasia dates back to the first century B.C. with the ancient Romans and Greeks. Euthanasia received its meaning from the Greek word euthanatos meaning good or well death. The idea of euthanasia came before Christianity and the value of individual human rights. In first century B.C. the Greeks and Romans had a “widespread support for voluntary death as opposed to prolonged agony, and physicians complied by often giving their patients the poisons they requested” (Dowbiggin). It was not until thirteenth century B.C. when Christianity was in full swing. The upbringing of Christianity placed euthanasia under the spot light. Many strict followers of Christianity and Judaism believed that human life is a responsibility of God; not to be put in the hands of a doctor. It was not until mid-seventeenth century when reformation of the church began. Reformation brought upo...
Physician assisted suicides is among the modern greatest challenges that come with the medical professions ethic responsibilities. Assisted suicides threaten the greater core of the profession of medicine and its integrity since it is not just a proposal towards the care of the dying but the means to their death.
As patients come closer to the end of their lives, certain organs stop performing as well as they use to. People are unable to do simple tasks like putting on clothes, going to the restroom without assistance, eat on our own, and sometimes even breathe without the help of a machine. Needing to depend on someone for everything suddenly brings feelings of helplessness much like an infant feels. It is easy to see why some patients with terminal illnesses would seek any type of relief from this hardship, even if that relief is suicide. Euthanasia or assisted suicide is where a physician would give a patient an aid in dying. “Assisted suicide is a controversial medical and ethical issue based on the question of whether, in certain situations, Medical practioners should be allowed to help patients actively determine the time and circumstances of their death” (Lee). “Arguments for and against assisted suicide (sometimes called the “right to die” debate) are complicated by the fact that they come from very many different points of view: medical issues, ethical issues, legal issues, religious issues, and social issues all play a part in shaping people’s opinions on the subject” (Lee). Euthanasia should not be legalized because it is considered murder, it goes against physicians’ Hippocratic Oath, violates the Controlled
Whose life is it, anyway? Euthanasia is a word that means good death. Euthanasia normally implies that the act must be initiated by the person who wishes to commit suicide. But, some people define euthanasia to include both voluntary and involuntary termination of life. Physician assisted suicide is when a physician supplies information and/or the means of committing suicide (lethal dose of sleeping pills or carbon monoxide gas) to a person, so that they can easily terminate their own life.
Euthanasia has been practiced in human culture throughout history, though it was usually called mercy killing. Ancient Greek philosophers considered it to be morally acceptable, but it was still carried out in secret, up until now. Physicians and common folk alike have had to perpetuate euthanasia in secret because of the strict laws surrounding it. Assisted suicide was against the law as well as physician-assisted suicide, so if it were to be done, it had to be in secret. In the 1940’s, technology advancements allowed more means by which to keep sick and dying patients alive, which greatly decreased the chances for assisted suicide to take place. At that time, numerous doctors strictly interpreted the Hippocratic Oath, meaning that by all
The Christian view of Euthanasia is that it is wrong. They understand, the pain and emotional suffering, caused in the case of terminally ill, but believe that a hospice is a better solution and that to commit Euthanasia is murder and a degrading act upon human life.
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?