Therefore, by not killing the patient, the physician and caregivers are causing suffering to that patient. In certain circumstance I would agree that the intention of the killing, for being to relieve suffering, absolves the physician or caregivers of guilt normally associated with the act of killing. ... ... middle of paper ... ...ing people to be killed instead of aiming to heal. Personal judgements regarding others choice to die of natural causes or to be euthanized should be reserved, especially if the patient is choosing to no longer be a burden on their loved ones because this too is a valid reason in some circumstance. We all die in an innumerable amount of ways and our autonomous decision to choose Active Euthanasia or PAS should be respected as should our choice to refuse euthanasia.
One can also think of euthanasia as a means of painlessly killing one suffering from an incurable illness. Voluntary, involuntary, and non-voluntary are the three types of euthanasia. The first involves explicit consent from the patient, for example, through a living will. Involuntary is the case in which the patient has not consented or is not aware of euthanasia being performed. The third concerns cases where consent is not available, for example, in cases where the person is severely injured or in a
The types of euthanasia are active, passive, voluntary, non-voluntary, involuntary, and indirect. Active Euthanasia is when a person directly and deliberately causes the patient’s death while passive euthanasia is when a person does not directly take the person’s life but allows death to happen. Voluntary euthanasia is when the patient requests to end his or her life while non voluntary euthanasia is when the person that will die does not make the decision but a appropriate person makes the decision on their behalf. Involuntary euthanasia is when a perso... ... middle of paper ... ...anasia and physician assisted suicide as morally wrong while proponents argue that it allows a person to die with dignity. My personal belief is that euthanasia and physician assisted suicide are almost always immoral.
Some say that with passive euthanasia the doctor does not actually know whether the patient will die and so stopping treatment is okay because it lets nature take its course. The patient is dying from a natural cause which is what makes passive euthanasia okay. Daniel Callahan, author of the article “Vital Distinctions, Mortal Questions: Debating Euthanasia and Health Care Costs”, argues that there is a distinction between passive and active euthanasia. He claims the difference between the two is what is causing the death. In terms of active euthanasia, the action of the doctor is what is physically causing the death of the patient, however, in the case of passive euthanasia allowing someone to die from a disease that is incurable is letting the disease act as the cause of death instead of the doctor.
Voluntary euthanasia includes having a patient give the doctor orders to end his or her life (Frey 324). Non-voluntary euthanasia involves one taking the steps to end the live of someone else that qualifies as incompetent by legal and medical authorities (Frey 324). And when steps are taken to end a patient’s life without the patient’s consent qualifies as involuntary euthanasia (Frey 324). Experts call involuntary euthanasia murder, because no patient or any legal authority gives permission to end the life. When a patient wishes to end his or her own life, ... ... middle of paper ... ...meny and Geoffrey McNicoll.
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.
Two additional concepts are relevant to the discussion of euthanasia. First, voluntary euthanasia refers to mercy killing that takes place with the explicit and voluntary consent of the patient, either verbally or in a written document such as a living will. Second, nonvoluntary euthanasia refers to the mercy killing of a patient who is unconscious, or otherwise unable to explicitly make their intentions known. In these cases it is often family members who make the request. This would be done against the wi... ... middle of paper ... ...ss, and not enough on other intrinsic goods, such as justice and rights.
Euthanasia as Mercy or Murder "In keeping with the root definition of 'euthanasia'- literally [meaning] 'good death'- [supporters] of euthanasia insist they are talking about helping terminally ill patients in insufferable pain die a dignified death- at the patient's request. But this bears no resemblance to the true picture of the actual practice of euthanasia in the United States" (Lyons np). Passive euthanasia is death by nonintervention, meaning a health care worker can discontinue providing life-sustaining treatment to the patient, thus allowing him to die more quickly. "In all actuality, [passive] euthanasia often involves withholding food and water from a patient whose death is caused by starvation or dehydration rather than the patient's underlying disease" (Lyons np). In active euthanasia, a physician or family member takes the life of a patient by means of lethal injection, before he or she dies of a terminal illness or injury.
If a person is sick then they usually take medicine, which is a technological aid. We can compare giving a sick person medicine to giving a dying person life, but we can't stand in the way of the sick if they want to be sick. If a terminally sick person wants to die, we can't stand in their way either. Suicide is murder, and that is why it is against the law. Letting a dying person die and helping a dying person die are two different things.
Euthanasia, in general, is defined as the act or practice of ending the life of an individual that is suffering from a terminal illness or an incurable condition, by a lethal injection. (Euthanasia, n.d.) Non-voluntary euthanasia involves the guardian of the patient in making the final decision regarding their care. The patient is unable to make such a decision because they are either unconscious due to disease ... ... middle of paper ... ... allowing them to suffer and to die with dignity. A New Zealand Resource for Life Related Issues. (2011).