I am writing to you today with both the interests of the public, and my own interests, on the topic of Euthanasia becoming legalized in British Columbia. In a 2013 poll conducted by Life Canada the findings were that in British Columbia 63% of Canadians believed that Assisted Suicide be brought into place, and 55% believed that Euthanasia should take action, although some hesitated because of the numbers of non-consensual Euthanasia deaths in Belgium. Having Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide legalized would not only be able to help the terminally ill and physically disabled decide how they wish for their life to end, but the legalization would also save a lot of time, money, and resources in hospitals and palliative care facilities. Although some laws such as section 241 of the Criminal Code would need to be reviewed, Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide could potentially end some people’s suffering, and save money and resources for the province. My first argument is related to end of life decisions and life support. How is it that your family has the right to make an end of life decision when the subject is unable to, while they are unable to make their own decision when they are fully capable. For example, if someone were to get into an accident or become ill to the point of needing life support, it is the family’s decision on if and when to, “pull the plug” on their family member. This is seen as completely acceptable in the public’s eyes while in reality the patient did not give consent or the decision themselves. Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide would allow the patient themselves decide whether or not they wish to die early or at what point they would wish to receive a life ending substance. This would be completely on the ... ... middle of paper ... ...ed Suicide could potentially free up more space in hospitals and give others the chance to receive better care earlier on in their disease, giving them a chance to recover. The money saved could also be used to fund lifesaving research to one day be able to cure a terminal disease. As shown above, patient morality and end of life care, is a huge part of the course of action when faced with a terminal, or physically disabling disease. Many patients wish not to experience the worst of the disease at all, and Euthanasia and assisted suicide would give them the chance to end their life as they choose, and pain free. It is my hope that you understand my opinion on the topic, and where I stand on the issue. The general public and I hope to see Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide be brought into legislation in British Columbia. Thank you for taking the time to see my standpoint
Reflecting on Canada's view on euthanasia, a study was performed to ask the general population on how they felt about euthanasia and their opinion of euthanasia being illegal in Canada. Findings by Wilson et al., (2013) showed a majority of people believed that with properly followed guidelines, euthanasia should be legalized in Canada. This study found that although euthanasia is considered illegal in Canada, there were very few criminal convictions of people when following through with euthanasia. The general population felt that the process of euthanasia was monitored very well and that with appropriate steps it was not a big issue as it is perceived to be. Als...
The topic of euthanasia and assisted suicide is very controversial. People who support euthanasia say that it is someone 's right to end their own life in the case of a terminal illness. Those in favor of this right consider the quality of life of the people suffering and say it is their life and, therefore, it is their decision. The people against euthanasia argue that the laws are in place to protect people from corrupt doctors. Some of the people who disagree with assisted suicide come from a religious background and say that it is against God’s plan to end one 's life. In between these two extreme beliefs there are some people who support assisted suicide to a certain degree and some people who agree on certain terms and not on others.
This topic usually not a friendly dinner conversation (Suicide, Euthanasia, and Assisted Suicide). Assisted suicide is continued to be a debatable topic among Americans today. Whether death is a legal right or something that people should let nature take care of is still being decided. Although the topic of assisted suicide is not completely illegal in the United States, four states have legalized it in the past years. The states that are legalized are Montana, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington (Euthanasia Should be Legalized). Euthanasia can help terminally ill patients of sound and mind end their suffering and expensive medical bills. Many individuals think it is their right as a human to control their destiny (Assisted Suicide). Ending one’s life may also be hard for family and friends to accept as well as being against many peoples beliefs. Every person’s life is sacred no matter the defects or faults, and they should be treated as so.
Arguments in support for physician-assisted suicide are that it allows people who are terminally ill to be relieved of their pain and suffering. It also allows a terminally ill person to die in dignity. Furthermore, choosing when to die is personal freedom. On the other hand, death is the natural part of human nature and nobody has the right to decide when to die or live not even the doctor. Physician-assisted suicide may lead to abuse by relatives or friends who have ulterior motives other than the wish of the person to get well. Legalization of euthanasia might lead to assaults on individual autonomy, which means it will be abused by people; that is people might be placed in terrible conditions intentionally by their friends, relatives or families and then suggest to the doctor that their lives be terminated since the individual cannot function as a human being. It might end up being a substitute for rational therapeutic, psychological, and social interventions, which could have otherwise enhanced the quality of life for patients who are dying. There is now even evidence that the legalization of assisted suicide in the Northern Territory in Australia has undermined the people's trust in the medical care system (Levine 2012).
Margaret Somerville, who has authored, edited, and co-edited a number of books and newspaper articles opposing the use of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide and who also is the Samuel Gale Professor of Law, Professor in the Faculty of Medicine, and Founding Director of the Centre for Medicine, Ethics, and Law at McGill University, Montreal, wrote the internet article titled “Against Euthanasia.” In the article Somerville blatantly states that any type of euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide is completely and totally wrong under all circumstances. She offers the two major reasons why she considers the practice of euthanasia to be entirely immoral and unacceptable. The first main reason that is given is, “that it is wrong for one human to intentionally kill another, except in self-defense.”The second key reason she provides is, “that the harms and risks of legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide far outweigh any benefits” . Somerville believes that euthanasia proponents base their arguments on emotions rather than on logic and use dramatic and compelling stories to make their points. She later goes on to say, “To legalize euthanasia would fundamentally change the way we understand ourselves, human life and its meaning." It is also stated that if euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are made legal then abuse and over use are inevitable and unstoppable. Another point made in the article is that if doctors and nurses are allowed to assist in the deaths of their patients that the trustworthiness of doctors would be skewed and patients would live in fear of going to the hospital and receiving care for whatever illness, disease, or problem they may have (Somerville). She brings her article to a close by stressing...
Although euthanasia and assisted suicide are frowned upon, legalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide would be beneficial to society. Through many forms of euthanasia and assisted suicide, people choose to end their own lives to relieve their suffering, to keep their autonomy and their desire to be able to perform their daily activities, and to prevent the fear of burdening their family. Even though euthanasia and assisted suicide are not considered the norm by doctors, the goal of a doctor should be to relieve the pain of a patient in any way the patient requests.
Euthanasia in a controversial topic that does not get enough attention. It is literally a life or death situation. The legalization of Euthanasia or Physician-Assisted-Suicide is plea of all terminally ill patients for freedom. It gives those patients the right to die with dignity and to end all the pain and suffering that comes with dying from a disease. Why should people’s loved ones be forced to go through all the pain if it can all be ended with one treatment? Many people ask: what is euthanasia? Why would a person want to end their life? How would that person’s family feel about the procedure? These are all common questions that have answers; people just do not do research to find their answers. Euthanasia is not a bad thing; it’s the process of helping a person become free of pain and suffering.
The right to die is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as, “pertaining to, expressing, or advocating the right to refuse extraordinary measures intended to prolong someone's life when they are terminally ill or comatose” (Definition). There has been a constant debate for over a century regarding the controversial right to die topic. Many people have different views and plenty of questions arise when dealing with such a sensitive subject. Should we be given the right to commit suicide with the help of a physician? Should we be able to refuse treatments and procedures at our own will? These questions are the same questions that have been up for debate for years. These are the questions that have sent many people to court throughout these past years. Those are the people that have set precedents, changed laws and have been a part of historic cases.
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
A recent survey by the Canadian Medical Association discovered that “ . . . 44 per cent of doctors would refuse a request for physician-assisted dying . . . ” (Kirkey 2). Euthanasia is defined as assisting a terminally ill patient with dying early. In many countries the legalization of this practice is being debated in many countries. All doctors against assisted suicide, including the 44 percent in Canada, are on the right side of the argument. Euthanasia should not be legalized because it is unnatural, it violates the Hippocratic Oath, and laws are to extensive.
It truly seems as if the number one opposing idea to these options is that it could become available to the public and then people would take advantage of them. In order to combat effectively instill the right restrictions both euthanasia and assisted suicide would have to be available. Only through following through and legalizing them for those with incurable diseases can the proper laws be laid out in clear and specific terms. "The right of a competent, terminally ill person to avoid excruciating pain and embrace a timely and dignified death bears the sanction of history and is implicit in the concept of ordered liberty” (“Top 10 Pros. . .” par. 3). At the end of it all, if a person is willingly and cautiously making their own decision to end their suffering then the right should be afforded to them. As society progresses in the medical field it seems that people are becoming more able to increase the length of their lives. Instead, “.. . a mentally competent, terminally ill person has a protected liberty interest in choosing to end intolerable suffering by bringing about his or her own death” (“Top 10 Pros. . .” par. 3). When others try to control another 's actions because of their own beliefs it comes off as intrusive and unwarranted. Universally, people are given the freedom to choose, whether there are
Euthanasia is clearly a mercy for those who suffer immensely through disease. Euthanasia should be an option for those that want it. It is obvious that many will still have objections and many will not make such a choice, but if they so choose, a quick and easy death awaits. I personally am not against euthanasia.
“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...
Should a patient have the right to ask for a physician’s help to end his or her life? This question has raised great controversy for many years. The legalization of physician assisted suicide or active euthanasia is a complex issue and both sides have strong arguments. Supporters of active euthanasia often argue that active euthanasia is a good death, painless, quick, and ultimately is the patient’s choice. While it is understandable, though heart-rending, why a patient that is in severe pain and suffering that is incurable would choose euthanasia, it still does not outweigh the potential negative effects that the legalization of euthanasia may have. Active euthanasia should not be legalized because
Euthanasia, a sensitive and delicate subject. The termination of someone who is very sick to relieve them of the suffering of their disease is a great moral dilemma. The debate on the ethics of Euthanasia can incite strong emotions on both sides of the argument, those who support the idea and those who oppose the idea with great dislike. I happen to believe that euthanasia or assisted suicide is not as morally wrong as some people make it out to be. Does an individual on his deathbed not have the right to die with dignity and no pain? Is putting that individual out if his misery not morally right? Is trying to stop ones suffering not morally wrong?