Argumentative Essay On Euthanasia

Back in 1948, Gallup produced a poll to ask Americans a serious, but needed question: “When a person has a disease that cannot be cured, do you think doctors should be allowed by law to end the patient’s life by some painless means if the patient and his or her family request it?” (McCarthy, 2014). In 1948, only 37% of Americans thought this was a good idea, but in 2014 it jumped to 69% (2014). Why do Americans support the treatment now as opposed to back then? It’s because the process of euthanasia is a beneficial procedure for the patient in need. The term euthanasia is broadly defined as the painless killing suffering from an incurable disease in which the patient is killed mercifully through a third party. This kind of procedure is used

Mrs. Maynard was diagnosed with terminal brain cancer earlier in the year and was told her life span was getting smaller. Rather than waiting for the inevitable suffering, she moved to Oregon, where euthanasia is legal, to purchase the necessary barbiturates and ended her life. Before her death, Mrs. Maynard wrote on the CNN website and stated that, “I would not tell anyone else that he or she should choose death with dignity. My question is: Who has the right to tell me that I don’t deserve this choice?” (2014). This kind of thinking triggers the moral argument for voluntary active euthanasia, meaning the patient is terminally ill and no longer has any chance of recovering, resulting in their decision to die on their own terms. These people are competent to die as they wish based on the respect for their autonomy and who are we to come in between their own decision making (Chadwick, 2005). The patients should be given the option as a route in case other possible outcomes are not available. Having this option can relieve the patient from unescapable physical and emotional pain that would soon follow with their

Euthanasia is something that is only given when the patient is competent to understand the decision they are making. Psychologists assess the patient’s mental ability to grasp the concept of euthanasia, making the final call whether the they can go through with the procedure. Sanson, along with other personnel from the Australian Psychological Society (1996), claim that in order to protect the individual, assessments are made that look back on the patient’s history, his/her fears, and their expectation of euthanasia (p. 17). The typical role is to provide the psychosocial support in a way that ensures that the person understand the following: The alternatives of euthanasia like psychological care, understanding the medical process, exploration of the broader issues that led to the decision, and objectively supporting the decision made by the patient (p. 19). The hardest part of euthanasia for a psychologist is staying objective. Technically, the patient has the option to go through therapy and work with a psychiatrist. When they disregard their option, psychologists feel as if they haven’t fulfilled their job. However, they are able to support and help the patient, despite their feelings towards it. With something this serious to consider, society is reluctant to let someone decided when it is right to die, despite their