I’m writing this letter in response to the “backyard euthanasia” article written by “Aisha Dow”, and “Farrah Tomazin” on October 8, 2017. The reason for this letter to express the strong opinions I have on this new article and to try to make a difference, no matter how minimal. In this article, the two authors went over a new euthanasia case and its possible effects on the law. This case is when the recently deceased elderly Robin Collin, shot himself in the head in his backyard, relieving himself of the pain he was going through once and for all. Even though Robin Collins was an adventurous and well-loved family man, he couldn’t continue to struggle against myelofibrosis , a form of blood cancer. The article then continued on by going over …show more content…
In my point of view, the inability to use euthanasia contradicts human rights. When people say that euthanasia should not be allowed, they’re basically stating that freedom has a limit, even though that shouldn’t be the case in this specific example based on “The Universal Declaration of Human Rights”. This is pure injustice because when people are unable to continue with life, instead of spending their lost moments painlessly with their family, they have to use a gruesome method alone. When someone has to go through so much pain that they can’t continue, why do people work toward making it so that they also have to worry about implicating their family? My other opinion on the articles is that it’s too optimistic. The writers go over how this could start people on talking more seriously on this issue, but I disagree. Even if many agree euthanasia is right, most won’t start protesting over it or calling their local politicians, they’re not motivated. This is because they can’t relate to it, while people will fight for rights like for all races to be equal, they won’t be as motivated over it because most people don’t ever need this option in their life. In my opinion, euthanasia is just as much as a right as the right to drive or to vote and as citizens, we should be responsible and help our communities by making it a viable
Bibliography:.. Bernard, Neal, Ed. & Co. d. a. a. a. a. a. Euthanasia: Opposing Viewpoints. Opposing Viewpoints Series, Series Eds. David L. Bender and Bruno Leone.
Imagine, if you will, that you have just found out you have a terminal medical condition. Doesn’t matter which one, it’s terminal. Over the 6 months you have to live you experience unmeasurable amounts of pain, and when your free of your pain the medication you’re under renders you in an impaired sense of consciousness. Towards the 4th month, you begin to believe all this suffering is pointless, you are to die anyways, why not with a little dignity. You begin to consider Physician-Assisted Suicide (PAS). In this essay I will explain the ethical decisions and dilemmas one may face when deciding to accept the idea of Physician-Assisted Suicide. I will also provide factual information pertaining to the subject of PAS and testimony from some that advocate for legalization of PAS. PAS is not to be taken lightly. It is the decision to end one’s life with the aid of a medical physician. Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary states that PAS is “Suicide by a patient facilitated by means (as a drug prescription) or by information (as an indication of a lethal dosage) provided by a physician aware of the patient’s intent.” PAS is considered, by our textbook – Doing Ethics by Lewis Vaughn, an active voluntary form of euthanasia. There are other forms of euthanasia such as non-voluntary, involuntary, and passive. This essay is focusing on PAS, an active voluntary form of euthanasia. PAS is commonly known as “Dying/Death with Dignity.” The most recent publicized case of PAS is the case of Brittany Maynard. She was diagnosed with terminal brain cancer in California, where she lived. At the time California didn’t have Legislative right to allow Brittany the right to commit PAS so she was transported to Oregon where PAS is legal....
Today, there is a large debate over the situation and consequences of euthanasia. Euthanasia is the act of ending a human’s life by lethal injection or the stoppage of medication, or medical treatment. It has been denied by most of today’s population and is illegal in the fifty states of the United States. Usually, those who undergo this treatment have a disease or an “unbearable” pain somewhere in the body or the mind. Since there are ways, other than ending life, to stop pain caused by illness or depression, euthanasia is immoral, a disgrace to humanity, according to the Hippocratic Oath, and should be illegal throughout the United States.
I picked voluntary euthanasia as my written assignment topic this week because while reading through it, my mother’s comment of that she wants to just pass away quickly, rather suffering slowly and be a burden to everyone around here a long time ago came to my mind. She made that comment after visiting someone dying from cancer, so I understand why she made that remark. The reasons cited for voluntary euthanasia is to end the suffering and stop being a burden to everyone around you and is asking for health professionals to assist in ending your life (Young, 2014). Not many countries as we learned has legalized euthanasia, but a few like the Netherlands has set 5 very strict conditions for asking for voluntary euthanasia which are: “suffering
Euthanasia is a subject that society is not just going to let pass by them without society giving their points of view. Euthanasia is just another excuse for physician’s to be able to kill another human life that could still be worth living, just as abortion is seen. As society has grown since ancient times they have come across many more debates and many more reasons why euthanasia so be allowed or not allowed. If society allows such an act of degrading of a life, we will be taking life into our hands and will be leading into a whole different world. The main question that boggles many people’s minds is that if society allows this form of killing to go on then what is society going to let happen next? Is society taking life into our own hands or is our life taking us into its hands?
In the United States, euthanasia should be legalized. In the year of 1992, Chris Docker wrote about an elderly woman going through the last painful stages of her life. Docker shared that “Mrs. Boyes' was so ill that she "screamed like a dog" if anyone touched her… when she repeatedly requested to die, Dr. Cox finally gave her an injection of potassium chloride, bestowing on her the boon of a peaceful death so many of us feel we are entitled to” (Docker). This unfortunate situation is presented to many doctors across the US. With euthanasia currently being illegal, they cannot provide proper care for their patients. Euthanasia can spare many people of their undesirable agony they face close to their passing. Too many people are suffering from a terminal illness and wanting to be put out of their misery; therefore, euthanasia should be made legal and enforced nationwide.
...d to a person’s suffering. People from all over the world have completely different opinions about assisted suicide. Many people believe that euthanasia is a very effective way of ending a person’s grief. Many people are fighting against the law. The law against assisted suicide is unjust and should be illuminated. The government should have no say in whether a person’s heart stops beating because of their agony. Euthanasia should be up to the sick individual and the government’s decision to place a law should be withdrawn. But euthanasia has to be done in an ethical manner and humanely. Restrictions should be placed around euthanasia and should be done in a very delicate and specific way. It should be understood that euthanasia should only be used under extreme circumstances and to ease a person’s pain. A person’s torturous life can easily come to a gentle close.
“Michael Manning, MD, in his 1998 book Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide: Killing or Caring?, traced the history of the word euthanasia: ‘The term euthanasia.originally meant only 'good death,'but in modern society it has come to mean a death free of any anxiety and pain, often brought about through the use of medication.” It seems there has always been some confusion and questions from our society about the legal and moral questions regarding the new science of euthanasia. “Most recently, it has come to mean'mercy killing' — deliberately putting an end to someone’s life in order to spare the individual’s suffering.’” I would like to emphasize the words “to spare the individual’s suffering”.
Merriam-Webster defines euthanasia as “the act or practice of killing or permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured individuals (as persons or domestic animals) in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy.” As a globally issues, euthanasia is always in controversial. Swanton,D argued that euthanasia protects the rights of individuals and the freedom of religious expression. Additionally, Sydeny,D outlines europe’s increasing acceptance of euthanasia which may mean that euthanasia is a preferable choice for people. Conversely, Fagerlin, A PhD from University of Michigan Medical School and Carl E. Schneider, JD from University of Michigan Law School suggest the great distortion of living wills if euthanasia is allowed. What is
In the end, it really all comes down to each of us as individuals who should be free to make our own choices on how we leave this world if we find ourselves in the unlucky fate of suffering through any form of debilitating illness. Our constitution gives us certain rights and freedoms as it relates to religion, speech, and our right to bear arms, so too should we have the right to die with the dignity we deserve by having a say in how we die when we can. That being said, with every right that is afforded comes great responsibility: As a society, we cannot bury our heads in the sand and pretend that the issues that contribute to the great divide when it comes to sensitive topics like euthanasia will go away if we do nothing
The debate over euthanasia is a prevalent and pressing issue in today’s society, and possibly one of the most popular. Euthanasia is a topic that will separate a room of people by beliefs. About three years ago, 22 percent of the 18 members of the Humane Society board resigned over the controversial issue of euthanasia (Humane Society CEO Search Reignites Euthanasia Debate 2014). This is a debated issue in which many believe that a person should have the right to decide on how they feel (EUTHANASIA Will Be Debated at an Event in Cheltenham This Week 2014). Euthanasia is a heavily debated topic that is deeply divided because of personal conviction or religion. This is an ongoing moral and ethical worldwide debate, is the w...
In order to provide a framework for my thesis statement on the morality of euthanasia, it is first necessary to define what euthanasia is and the different types of euthanasia. The term Euthanasia originates from the Greek term “eu”, meaning happy or good and “thanatos”, which means death, so the literal definition of the word Euthanasia can be translated to mean “good or happy death”.
More than likely, a good majority of people have heard about euthanasia at least once in their lifetime. For those out there who have been living under a rock their entire lives, euthanasia “is generally understood to mean the bringing about of a good death – ‘mercy killing’, where one person, ‘A’, ends the life of another person, ‘B’, for the sake of ‘B’.” (Kuhse 294). There are people who believe this is a completely logical scenario that should be allowed, and there are others that oppose this view. For the purpose of this essay, I will be defending those who are suffering from euthanasia.
Although some people believe that euthanasia devalues life, I do not agree because I feel that it gives the patient an opportunity to end his or her life by celebrating their life in the company of loved ones. To conclude, I think that society's view on euthanasia needs to be more open, and hopefully people will realise that it is a positive thing, and not just a means of a quick death.
Society’s major arguments in favor of euthanasia believe that first, human beings have the right to decide when and how to die. Secondly, they believe that it is cruel and inhumane to refuse someone the right to die, when they are suffering intolerable and unstoppable pain, or distress. Thirdly, euthanasia should be allowed when it is in the best interests of all involved and does not violate anyone's rights. Finally, if death is not a terrible thing, then making it come sooner isn't a bad thing (life related issues). Also, they believe that allowing the act of ending someone’s life helps shorten the grief and suffering of the patient’s loved ones.