Argumentative Essay On Euthanasia

It has the minds of society wondering if death solves some of the most extreme medical problems. If a patient finds himself or herself terminally ill and in excruciating pain, they should have the option to partake in assisted suicide to end their misery. Some insights support Euthanasia and some reject the concept. This issue is important to society because people want the right to end their lives when facing terminal, or life threatening, illnesses. In my opinion, certain forms of euthanasia should be considered legal.

Literally a life changing choice. Society should accept people for their disabilities, and not dispose of them because they are too much of an inconvenience; therefore, euthanasia is wrong because a “slippery slope” or a rapid upcoming to even murder may happen, if legalized, each and every life is valuable, and euthanasia is an unnatural death. If legalized, euthanasia may be on a “slippery slope” to murder or non-voluntary euthanasia. Many people are concerned that if euthanasia is legalized there will be even more big controversial topics legalized in the future. As of 2002, euthanasia became legal legal in the Netherlands, although performed regularly before that, without consequences.

“Many people think that each person has the right to control his or her body and life and so should be able to determine at one time, in what way and by whose hand he or she will die” (Pro-euthanasia Arguments 1). To some, this statement is absolutely true. Though there are some opposing views on the subject. Ben Mattlin proves this by saying “... why on Earth should we as a society rush to make it easier for people with incurable conditions to end their lives before we’ve done all we can to ensure they have the same opportunities and protections as anyone else?” But why on Earth should the patients be given opportunities when that’s not the thing they wanted in the first place? This is the time when the act of choice steps up to the plate, and becomes the batter.

What makes the right to die different from physician administered suicide. This contributes to the issue of humane death distinguished from humane killing. Patients could be essentially be “euthanized” on the regular. These deaths now take place in hospitals which makes it highly cost ineffective, some fear that if they are dying care will decrease in quality. Withdrawal of treatment or pain relief in lethal measures is the concern for the unethicality, some see this as an alternative to long-term care.

This also means an ordinary human right such as nutrition or hydration cannot be with held to induce death. The injury or disease must be the cause of death not the act of the withdrawing the life support system. Active euthanasia is the direct and intentional killing of someone when given consent or consent can’t be given. Active euthanasia usually takes the form of a lethal dose of medication to ensure a painless death. Active euthanasia has been requested by people suffering from diseases and syndromes that have reduced their quality of life to a point at which that believe that death is a better option than living in their pained and often vegetative state.

In most cases, passive euthanasia is permitted but whether or not active euthanasia should be allowed creates a major controversy. (Rachel,452) The question, should a person be allowed to end their life through active euthanasia when they are terminally ill and the pain of dying is unbearable, seems easy enough to answer. Many sound arguments and well presented cases refuting euthanasia, however, have proved it to be ethically, morally, and legally wrong. The pro-euthanasia case is based on two main claims. Some argue that "patients whose illnesses cause them unbearable suffering should be permitted to end their distress by having a physician perform euthanasia"(Singer and Seigler p.381), while others on the same side argue that the decision to turn toward euthanasia is one's own; that "the well-recognized right of patients to control their medical treatment includes the right to request and receive euthanasia" (Singer and Seigler,381).

Needless suffering will continue in the US if the laws are not changed to reflect the current changes in medical care. The first argument for euthanasia is that commit suicide should be legal in general because there are people who’s being treated for so long and there’s nothing that could heal them to live longer. Why shouldn’t they allow the patients to choose their lives? So in order for them not to suffer they should have the permission from a doctor to commit suicide. It’s painful for those who wants to end their lives, but it’s more painful if

And who has the right to deny a person a peaceful ending to their life and stop the suffering permanently? Euthanasia is a very controversial topic and those in favour argue that it’s the patients choice what they do with their life in cases of terminal illnesses the death is inevitable so what is the point in prolonging the process? Others argue that Voluntary euthanasia will eventually lead to involuntary euthanasia and the termination of people deemed as undesirable. A strong ethical argument against the use of euthanasia is that, Lord Walton, chairman of a House of Lords committee looking into euthanasia says: “We concluded that it was virtually impossible to ensure that all acts of euthanasia were truly voluntary and that any liberalisation of the law in the United Kingdom could not be abused.” Since involuntary euthanasia is indistinguishable from murder it will be hard to identify and regulate murder cases as they can be passed off as involuntary euthanasia leading to the severity of murder as a crime being mediocre since people can escape the consequence using euthanasia. There is also concern that doctors are bestowed with too much power and... ... middle of paper ... ... used in other situations other than terminal illness is old age and being able to die with dignity before they are unable to go through with simple tasks such as going toilet alone, this is usually they don’t burden their families and retain pride.

Not let people ask for euthanasia goes against freedom. Freedom to decide is a fundamental part of every person and every society. The first reason for allowing euthanasia by law is to end the suffering of those who are terminally ill. Some people go through enormous pain and euthanasia allows them to die with dignity.

Euthanasia traditionally means a “good death.” The term has traditionally been used to refer to the hastening of a suffering person’s death or “mercy killing.” The legalization of euthanasia is important for the patient because it would give dying people a choice to determine if they want to fight the disease or end their suffering. Since I strongly believe the quality of human life is far more important than the length of life, therefore I am for legalizing of euthanasia. The reason I am for legalizing of euthanasia is because I don’t like the feeling of pain. I don’t think anyone likes that feeling. I hate seeing other people suffering from all kind of diseases.