On the other end, such assistance, or methods, are considered as a form of murder. As a “mercy killing”, people often inaccurately voice that human euthanasia is in a patient's best interests, disregarding the threats of: the slippery slope effect, no regulatory system, and sanctity of life infringement. A frequent argument against the legalization of human euthanasia is that it will begin a slippery slope towards involuntary (euthanizing of a patient without his or her consent) and non-voluntary (euthanizing of a patient not capable of giving consent) euthanasia . Society is only looking to legalize voluntary euthanasia, but the doors will open to non-voluntary and involuntary euthanasia, two methods of death that could easily be written off as murder. The slippery slope argument claims that if an action, such as euthanasia, were to be permitted, then society will be led down the slippery slope, or be permitting other actions that are morally wrong, “in general form, it means that if we allow something relatively harmless today, we may start a trend that results in something currently unthinkable becoming accepted” (“Anti-euthanasia”).
How do doctors have the ability to determine the quality of someone else’s life? Does a doctor really know for sure that the person could not get well again (Nordqvist)? According to the National Health System, “it is illegal to kill someone regardless of circumstances” (Nordqvist 1). And now we want to give people the chance to kill themselves when they feel they are ready? Suicide was determined a criminal act from the 1300’s, including assisting others in ending their own life.
Does this mean that we should throw out the death penalty because people, who did not really deserve to die, were killed? No, we have changed the laws, and no one gets the death penalty unless they deserve to die. Capital punishment should stay around. Yes, there are some maldistributions on the way it is opposed on a person, but those maldistributions are imposed on guilty people. Capital punishment is feared by potential murderers because once it is ordered on them they are not coming back.
It arrived from the prefix “eu”, meaning fear, easy, and fortunate and from the word “thanatos” meaning death. The main idea of Euthanasia is that someone has a conscientious death or a fortunate one. In other words, we attempt to ease one’s pain by murdering another human being to give him/her a so-called “easy death” which is illegal and morally wrong. The key element of one human being taking the life of another human being is not present. It is exactly this element that causes euthanasia to be morally wrong (Gay-Williams,288) There are different cases that might be hard to distinguish whether it is, or isn’t Euthanasia.
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.
Also euthanasia has two procedural classifications, passive and active. Passive euthanasia involves withdrawal of life-prolonging treatments, whereas active euthanasia as well-known as mercy killing involves the use of force or lethal substance are used to end a patient’s life. Active euthanasia include life-ending actions conducted by the patient or somebody else. In short: euthanasia involves killing the patient to eliminate the pain while end-of-life care involves eliminating the pain so that the patient can die painlessly, from natural causes. Euthanasia is very controversial in the sense, many argued that it is assisted suicide and could be a cover for outright murder.
This quote essentially states that the intentional killing of one human being by another (in this case, active euthanasia) goes against the AMA and is therefore wrong. The cessation of necessary treatment to prolong the life of the body by the patient or the immediate family (passive euthanasia) when there is irrefutable evidence that biological death is imminent, however, is permissible. His second premise is that “active euthanasia is a more efficient and humane means to ending the patient’s suffering than passive euthanasia.” To defend this claim, Rachel gives the case of a patient with incurable throat cancer. This patient is sure to die in a matter of days even if treatment is continued. The patient does not wish to live on in agony and asks the doctor to cease treatment.
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
Should Euthanasia be legalised in the UK? Euthanasia is the deliberate killing of an ill person’s life in order to soothe them from the suffering the illness is causing. This act is usually conducted by people with terminal illness; however there are other incidents which lead to euthanasia. In the UK euthanasia is illegal similarly Islamic countries forbid any form of suicide as they believe in the sanctity of life whereas in other countries such as Belgium and Luxembourg this is not the case .Should a person in a lot of pain be allowed to commit suicide to relieve their suffering? And who has the right to deny a person a peaceful ending to their life and stop the suffering permanently?
Keywords: Euthanasia, painless killing, societies, religions, morality INTRODUCTION Euthanasia also known as mercy killing, is a way of painlessly terminating one’s life with a motive of ending their suffering. It is also known as an assisted suicide. Different societies have different views on this, and this is why one needs to look at the arguments to understand the reasoning behind it from different perspectives. One can say that there are three types of Euthanasia; voluntary, involuntary and non-voluntary. Voluntary Euthanasia is considered when practiced with the person’s expressed choice to die, while practiced against their desire is considered involuntary.