It affirms life and regards death as a normal process, neither hastening nor postponing death, but providing relief from suffering” (“Anti-euthanasia”). With this information, the advocates should focus more on giving patients the correct and sufficient medical care that they need rather than finding a way to end lives from suffering. Euthanasia should not be legalized because the effects will cause much turmoil on both religious and moral standards, and the government should not be given control over the deaths of their citizens, especially when there are different steps that can be taken to prevent this hastened life-ending process. Euthanasia is not solely about a person’s ‘right to die’, but the consequences, evidence, and history described to show how grim euthanasia has and will become.
For a physician to deny the person his right to die when under intense pain and suffering is effectively, imposing them to live a life without what they believe is their dignity, a life of suffering and eventual could be ended if the patient choose to do so. Although the intentions may be good, no person has the right to demand of another person to live a life of suffering, in fact, that is immoral as it removes their right to choose. Euthanasia facilitates the choice making it the sympathetic choice and kind to that person 's
In this paper I have argued that: Health professionals should aim to improve health and suffering and not kill because it becomes overbearing, If hospitals had good palliative care then euthanasia wouldn’t be necessary, A patient who is in the process of dying isn’t in the right state of mind to make a decision such as ending their life, If euthanasia becomes legal, it doesn’t allow research to find cures for chronic illnesses, Euthanasia gives too much power to the doctors, Euthanasia destroys societal respect for life, and Giving the doctors this much power essentially leads to a variation of murder. Therefore, it is morally wrong for someone to kill a person; even it is on medical terms.
Many have mentioned that in there scripts they believe that we can’t control our life. They think that it is unreligious and inhumane to be allowing people to take charge of their life instead of god. many religious believe that god will control our death may we like it or not. If euthanasia is legalized it will most likely be in con... ... middle of paper ... ... turn into a huge chaos of people dying. Sincerely this way for looking for a non suffering death is very inhumane.
Kamisar argues that once euthanasia is legalized, it cannot be constrained to the terminally ill, and the reasons as to why life may seem intolerable to a reasonable person are discussed; however, to contend that euthanasia is justifiable, “is to show oneself out of touch with the depth arid complexity of human motives” (par. 32). If one agrees to reasons as to why euthanasia is justifiable, then there is no understanding to the intricacy of human impulse. The legalization of euthanasia would make it acceptable for people to be euthanized for other reasons than suffering and being terminally
Some people believe that even if euthanasia is immoral, it still should not be prohibited by law, since if a patient wants to die, that is strictly a personal affair, regardless of how foolish or immoral the desire might be. [Rachels, 56] My position is almost identical. I believe there are some instances in which euthanasia is immoral, but I believe it should unquestionably be legal. In the following paragraphs, I will display the position of the opposition to the legality of euthanasia as well as the position of the supporters. I shall attempt to prove that, yes, euthanasia should be legal.
The euthanasia debate raises many questions. Questions such as: who is the one benefited by the murder? Or should we allow family members to make a life-or-death decision over a loved one who may never have expressed a desire to die, simply because they could not say with words a will to live? If a person should be suffering with an illness of which there seems no hope of r... ... middle of paper ... ...sidered as ethical because it totally violates the will, the freedom of choice, and also the values of the ill person. Barbara McKinnon, "Euthanasia," Ethics Theory and Contemporary Issues, second edition, p.126, 1998 Barbara McKinnon, "Euthanasia," Ethics Theory and Contemporary Issues, second edition, p.126, 1998 http://charlacon.infosel.com/000165/lomejor.htm TTI Market Explorers, Poll of 603 Adults in British Colombia, Euthanasia Prevention Coalition, 1997 Clarendon Press, "Concise Oxford Dictionary", p. 895, 1995 .
However, according to Rachel, he says that “we ought to enforce a rigorous rule against it.” (Luper and Brown, p. 358). He gives two different forms: logical and psychology version of the slippery slope argument. Logical interpretation: in Bishop Sullivan view of euthanasia, he is saying that if we accept to allow euthanasia on a person that is suffering, we might kill others for no reason. However, Rachel objects to this argument proving that rational grounds do not prove that active euthanasia is legally prohibited in every case (Luper and Brown, p. 359). For instance, an ill person and a man with a disease, the first case; the person does not want to die, whereas, the second case the diseased patient wants to end his life using euthanasia which is acceptable to end the agony.
Although people who are terminally ill should not be forced to stay alive nor to suffer, the alternative, euthanasia, is against the law, for it pressures people emotionally and psychologically into death, and it is not a reliever of pain. Suicide has been legalized in the United States, and some think it’s only fair to do the same with euthanasia. Since suicide has been made legal, there are more suicides everyday than homicides, but suicide and euthanasia are quite different and should not be confused with each other. Suicide is a tragic event dealing with one person acting by him or her self, but euthanasia is not about a private act. It is one person doing something that directly kills another.
Euthanasia should be legalize in the United States because it gives an alternative for people who suffer every day due to a terminal illness, but it should be the last resort a patient should take. People who are against euthanasia claim that it is unethical and morally wrong to take someone’s life away. According to the article “Active Euthanasia Is Never Morally Justified,” euthanasia is a nice word that replaces the word murder (Doug). The author claims that people will use “terminal illness” to murder people without their consent. People that are on a vegetable state and cannot depend of themselves are force to accept the decisions of others.