In all these behaviours, a foreknowledge of the risk of death is present coupled with its acceptance. But all else is so different that they cannot be regarded as belonging to the same class. Suicide is chiefly intended to terminate a life – the other acts are aimed at perpetuating, strengthening and defending values. Those who commit suicide do so because they firmly believe in the finiteness of life and in the finality of death. They prefer termination to continuation.
It is my belief that assisted suicide and euthanasia (both passive and active) is morally ok. My main reason for thinking so stems from the idea that people should be allowed to make choices about their own life when it doesn’t affect anyone else. To me, dying is a very personal, one-sided ordeal that doesn’t involve other people as much as they think it does. People like to make themselves apart of other people’s deaths and to me that seems very selfish. Sure you have to deal with losing this person, but people become so focused on what they are losing and completely ignore the fact that the person dying is dealing with what is considered the biggest mystery on Earth. When someone decides that their life is no longer worth living, we shouldn’t come at them with guilt and anger.
If we agree that some people can choose when others would die this is murder in its entirety. Everything must be done to prevent death since life is valuable and desirable to pursue and possess. If one chooses to die this is termed as suicide and it’s not acceptable. It can be concluded that active euthanasia denies patients the right to live and should not be accept... ... middle of paper ... ...surers find euthanasia cheaper than extended medical care and due to this elderly people will be pressured to accept active euthanasia other than waiting for their day of death. Therefore, instead of active euthanasia palliative care should be considered since they do help in treatment of pain.
At first it was a person’s state of being and later signified the action(s) performed to rush death. It has kept its original meaning of having a peaceful/painless exit from life but it also takes the meaning of the intentional foreshortening of a person’s life to spare them from any further suffering. Active euthanasia is an action that intended to end the life of a greatly suffering person and has no chance to recover. Passive euthanasia is the intentional withholding of treatment that might lengthen someone’s life. This comes in hand with the Right-to-Die (RTD) movement because in RTD the suffering person is allowed to decide when it is they want to end their pain.
Marquis states that although the victim may believe that their life is valuable to them and the thought of death is frightening, their future does not hold anything of value and will only bring them further pain and suffering. Although he says that euthanasia is not immoral, his stance on abortion still fits with his stance on euthanasia. On the topic of euthanasia, if the patient is thinking rationally, he believes the victim should not have to suffer if their future holds no further value. Therefore, his theories and ideas still apply to each idea while simultaneously ensuring they do not conflict with one another.
First of all Epictetus argues that we shall not grieve over death because death is something we cannot control. If death is not something we control, then why do we implement services that honor the dead that are going to activate our uncontrollable emotions? We struggle with accommodating death because of the attention that death receives. Grieving is a natural emotion, the more the person is reminded of something the more emotional they will become. The more significant the loss the lengthier the grieving process lasts.
Those unfortunate patients that receive misdiagnosis would end their lives for no reason. Finally in a moral aspect, life is a precious gift and everyone has a purpose. Taking away someone's purpose unnecessarily would be cruel and selfish. There is truly no satisfying benefit to implementing Euthanasia. If it becomes legal people's lives would end sooner than it needs to be and sometimes unnecessarily.
The uncertainty that death creates in the cases of dying too early or the process of death, can arouse a sense of fear yet these to me seem the only instances in which it is rational to fear death. The idea of fearing something such as not existing seems irrational but stead we could replace fear with emotion’s such a sorrow and sadness, which are far more appropriate.
The afterlife of whatever is after death cannot harm a just and good man. It is only when a person has lived a life that is full of sins and evil does he/she find it rational to fear the unknown and death itself. A person must make a wager with the uncertainty of death. Either they are resolute with the idea that the uncertainty in life after death won 't affect the life they choose to life or they deal with a great deal of fear, knowing that the life they have choose brings in possible penalties in the events that proceed after
If we do not know about death then why fear something we do not know. We also cannot decide whether death is actually considered “evil”. There are many circumstances that people may think that it is better for a person to die than to live. In medical practices there is term known as euthanasia, which is intentionally ending a life in order to relive pain or medical assisted suicide. We cannot determine whether it is a bad for a person to die because this may actually end their