Death Of Death And Death

Natural and assisted suicide are both ethical for dying patients. Having a terminal diagnosis is a devastation situation to encounter, so giving these people the opportunity to end their life is a right that they

Death is a personal situation and decision in life. Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide have the power to save lives and by the government interfering and not legalizing it they are interfering and violating patient’s personal freedom and human rights. Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide should become legal for patients; however, there should be strict rules and guidelines to follow. If suicide isn’t a crime why should euthanasia and assisted suicide?

Because patients are rational agent, they are able to make their own decision based on reason. A rational patient will reason that if continued existence is full of suffering and no-hope for better well-being, therefore, the best option is to discontinue his/her life to save him/herself from that future condition. It is the patient’s approach to manage his/her own life. Dan W. Brock is right in his article “Voluntary Active Euthanasia” when he said that, “self-determination [or autonomy] has fundamental value… [because]… individual [can] control the manner, circumstances, and timing of their dying and death” (75). The dignity of the patient lies in their “capacity to direct their lives” (Brock 75).

It is not easy for most of us to see death as an inevitable part of life. However the issues that surround euthanasia are not only about death, they are about one's liberty, right to privacy, and control over one's own body (http://depts.washington.edu/bioethx/topics/pas.html). Assisted suicide should be allowed everywhere because everyone should have the right to choose how to live as well as how to die, it gives the person the option of a peaceful death as opposed to a painful death, and some terminally ill patients are allowed to end their lives by refusing medical treatments; in all fairness, those who don’t have that option should be allowed to choose death. Despite the changes in modern medicine, the attitudes toward assisted suicide in America’s courts and legislatures have not altered considerably. For instance, in June 1997, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that people do not have a constitutional right to assisted suicide.

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.

Philosophers like Frances M. Kamm support the patient’s right to death without anguish because he recognizes the peril a prolonged death may bring a 〖patient.〗^1 On the other side of the spectrum, Paul K. Longmore recognizes the benefits of assisted suicide, but believes that minority patients (such as ethnic or elderly individuals) will find themselves pressured into a decision if such an option 〖existed〗^2. Leon R. Kass believes that in some situations,

Legalizing Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide 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. Death is defined by “the absence of life” (Merriam-Webster). Many people have a different perception on when a person dies.

Len Doyal argues how euthanasia can be legal because physicians choose not to help their patients, but they can take their lives and experiment with it (65). When their decisions to try to benefit the patient’s life in the future go wrong, they only made them hurt more instead of helping them hurt less. Some say it is a crime, others say they are doing right. Doctors have a duty to help patients out as much as they can. People have the right to die and if they make the final decision that they do want to die, doctors should understand the patients decision and assist the needs and wants, concluding that euthanasia and physician assisted suicide should become legal in various areas of the world.

Most people believe in quality of life over quantity so with the availability of euthanasia people can dictate their lives and have the dignity of a chosen death. To deny an individual of the dignity of a chosen death, they are forced against their will to live out the rest of their life in agony and discomfort. Diaconescu (2012) believes that the law should not restrict individuals from their choice to preserve their quality of life in their own way. If an individual feels that dignity is unattainable due to the progression of a terminal illness, then taking recourse though assisted dying should to be a legitimate option. Keown (2002) comments that the main hindrance to the allowing of euthanasia has proved to be the objection that, even if they were morally acceptable in certain 'hard cases ', voluntary euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide could not be effectively controlled; society would slide down a 'slippery slope ' to the killing of patients who did not make a free and informed request, or for whom palliative care would have offered an alternative.

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.