When someone we love dies we feel pain, loss, but at least, as Christians, we know he is in a better place. But when someone we love is feeling pain, all what we want is to stop it, at any cost. Because of that, now that we have the technology for prolonging life, the word euthanasia started appearing. Euthanasia, from the Greek “well death”, is the practice of intentionally ending a life in order to relieve pain and suffering. The fact that we are able to make life longer does not mean that we can make it batter, when the quality of life expected is just of incredible pain, death may seem a better choice. Now that euthanasia is under the lights of press and legislation, choices that were personal a hundred of years ago are made public …show more content…
The Journal of Death and Dying defines euthanasia as < the synonym of the phrase mercy killing that involves either assisting in the commission of suicide or administrating painless and merciful death to a patient that is hopelessly ill> (Journal of Death and dying, 2015). What that “hopelessly” ill means is that there is nothing more for those people in this world, nothing more than pain for them and their families. Letting them go and find peace is an act of mercy and respect for their dignity. In the same article previously quoted we read that (Journal of Death and dying 2015) ; once again we see how euthanasia is a solution and not a condemn for people in pain. For a better understanding, we can look at a case of 1992 in which Dr. Cox had Mrs. Boyes as a patient. The 70 years old lady was suffering pain and agony: she used to scream if anyone tried to approach her and she was no more able to think rationally for more than a couple of minutes because of her pain. She used to ask for death every day, more than once. After years of care and with no hope of improvement, Dr. Cox broke the law and ended her life with an injection of potassium chloride. He was processed and condemned for helping his patient at the best of his capacity. Euthanasia was the last choice for …show more content…
In 1936 king George V was mumbling and cursing and his doctor decided that his dignity and quality of life were being damaged. In accord with the king he administered an injection of cocaine and morphine and ended his life. Nobody questioned that choice but if somebody was to do the same thing now the press would never let him free and the doctor would be probably sued. < In the past physicians could hasten death in special circumstances without the knowledge of their peers, and sometimes without even knowing with certainty whether their actions actually served to actually accelerate the process of dying, the regularity process is now strict enough that such actions cannot easily escape legislation> (Euthanasia and distinctive horizons and moral reasoning) . The way in which the law system may get to much involved in such personal choices is evident in the Englaro case. On January 18 Eluana Englaro is involved in a car accident. She is left completely paralyzed from the neck down and in a vegetative state due to her brain damages. The family started asking for the removal of life support arguing that Eluana had declared to family and friends her will previously. After a fight of 17 years her father finally obtained the removal of life support. In this case the Italian legislation tried to make the choice instead of the family. Eluana’s father had to look at her
Euthanasia is the fact of ending somebody’s life when assisting him to die peacefully without pain. In most cases, it is a process that leads to end the suffering of human beings due to disease or illness. A person other than the patient is responsible for the act of euthanasia; for example a medical provider who gives the patient the shot that must kill him. When people sign a consent form to have euthanasia, it is considered voluntary, involuntary euthanasia is when they refuse. When people are not alert and oriented they are not allowed to sign any consent including the consent to euthanasia. When euthanasia is practiced in such situation, it is a non-voluntary euthanasia. In sum, people who practice voluntary euthanasia in honoring other
The topic of euthanasia and assisted suicide is very controversial. People who support euthanasia say that it is someone 's right to end their own life in the case of a terminal illness. Those in favor of this right consider the quality of life of the people suffering and say it is their life and, therefore, it is their decision. The people against euthanasia argue that the laws are in place to protect people from corrupt doctors. Some of the people who disagree with assisted suicide come from a religious background and say that it is against God’s plan to end one 's life. In between these two extreme beliefs there are some people who support assisted suicide to a certain degree and some people who agree on certain terms and not on others.
Euthanasia is the act of ending a person’s life through lethal injection or through the removement of treatment. Euthanasia comes from the Greek word meaning “good death.” When a death ends peacefully, it is recognized as a good death. In modern society, euthanasia has come to mean a death free of any pain and anxiety brought on through the use of medication; this can also be called mercy killing, deliberately ending someone’s life in order to end an individual’s suffering. Anything that would ease human suffering is good. Euthanasia eases human suffering. Therefore, euthanasia is good. Because active euthanasia is considered as suicide or murder, it is a very controversial issue and therefore, illegal in most places. Although there are always
Our modern world is full of diseases that are often incurable, making people’s life a living torment, stealing the sense of living and encouraging a person to give up on everything. Even though the medical advances that are offered today are being developed to save a patient’s life or relieve their pain they fail to do so. There is a controversy between two groups those who believe euthanasia should be allowed and those who strongly believe it should be prohibited. Those against euthanasia see a doctor who performs it as a murderer, their believe’s foundation is that there is nobody else other than god who should end a life. ““eu” means good and “thanathous” means death” (Boudreau, et al. 2) Physicians should be allowed by law to prescribe
Is it Against the Law to Help Someone Else Commit Suicide? . (2013). Retrieved from FindLaw: http://healthcare.findlaw.com/patient-rights/is-it-against-the-law-to-help-someone-else-commit-suicide.html#sthash.2Rg28YAQ.v2hYML0G.dpuf
Once people decide to end their lives they give up. They give up on fighting for themselves and others that love them. At times they may not even be in the right state of mind when they make these decisions. When people know that they have a terminal illness they tend to go through depression. They think that they have nothing else to live for, but it is just a stage that they are going through. There are certain factors that are dangerous and lead people to end their lives. There are people that want euthanasia to be legalized but they do not understand the consequences that come with that legalization. Once euthanasia is legalized vulnerable patients could be talked into suicide and doctors could take that decision for them. Euthanasia should not be an easy way out to get rid of a patient’s pain.
The debate over whose decision it is to uphold a human life is one with a vast range of opinions. Some believe it should be up to God, whereas others assert that it is the right of an individual; however, the ultimate verdict rests in the hands of the government. When tragedy leaves a victim in critical condition with no assurance of recovery, circumstances do not allow for a straightforward action plan. In any state of affairs, it is optimal to continue the life of a patient, even if it seems as though the ideal solution is death. Medical practitioners, relatives, and patients themselves do not deserve the pressure to decide this grave fate. The choice between life and death should not exist. Every human is entitled to the right to live, and
In review, euthanasia is performed when the pain is too much for the patient. It is, overall, the patient’s life—their right and their choice. Everyone deserves to die compassionately, knowing that they will slip away painlessly. Everyone deserves to have a choice, especially when it comes to the manner of their death. If euthanasia is not legalized, many people will debilitating illnesses may take their lives in much more horrific ways. If they want the suffering to end badly enough, it is simply done one way or
Your right as a competent ill patient who is trying to avoid excruciating pain so you can embrace a timely and dignified death, will continue to be denied. It bears the sanction for some time now and is unspoken in the concept of ordered liberty. Why let the government or any human being continue to choose when you can or cannot end your own life? Another year has passed. The legalization of euthanasia is slowly trying to spreading through the United States. Legalizing euthanasia will free a patient from pain, a low quality life, an incurable disease, and financial debt along with depression.
It is safe to say that if given the choice, nobody would watch a loved one suffer. To repeatedly witness their pain on a day-to-day basis, some would consider it self-torture. But sadly some people do not have the luxury to choose, some people are forced to experience the tragedy of watching someone close to them slowly and painfully pass away. Waiting out an agonizing death should not be the only option a person, or a family, has when they are already faced with their imminent death. The other option should be euthanasia, the practice of intentionally ending a life in order to relieve pain and suffering.
As defined, euthanasia is a means to eliminate suffering. It implies that all sufferings are meaningless. We should remember that it is through Jesus’ suffering that He triumphs. I am not saying that we should always welcome pains. What I am trying to express is that mercy killing undermines the part of suffering in our lives. Euthanasia deprives us, particularly the sick, an opportunity to grow in trust, faith, and strength. Instead of thinking of suffering as only ache and agony, we should look at suffering as a way to develop our character and as a test of courageousness.
Euthanasia means different things to different people. The definition provided by www.euthanasia.com states that euthanasia is “the intentional killing by act or omission of a dependent human being for his or her alleged benefit. (The key word here is "intentional". If death is not intended, it is not an act of euthanasia)”. There are several key definitions listed on the euthanasia site such as voluntary euthanasia, involuntary euthanasia, assisted suicide, and euthanasia by action or omission. There are those who feel that euthanasia is an act of compassion at the end of ones life, while others such as www.euthanasia.com state that they “are committed to the fundamental belief that the intentional killing of another person is wrong.” The information outlined in this paper will help the reader to identify an understanding of what euthanasia is, how this practice is viewed by the rest of the world where the services are legal, the pros and cons, the affect it has on healthcare workers, patient centered experiences, as well as what patients use as an alternative to this practice.
Euthanasia is a word whose roots can be traced back to Greece where it meant good death. It encompasses various dimensions, from active where something is introduced to cause death, to passive where treatment or supportive actions are withheld. It also varies from voluntary euthanasia where one consents to it, to involuntary where a guardian can give consent and doctor assisted in which the doctors prescribes the medication and a third party or patient administers the prescription to cause death. Wishes for premature death have significantly contributed to the long debate regarding the role of this practice in the current health care. The debate however cuts across dynamic and complex aspects like ethical, legal, health, human rights, economic, religious, social, spiritual and cultural aspects of the enlightened society (Math & Chaturvedi, p. 889). Here, this intricate issue is argued from both sides of the ongoing debate and also the plight of the caregivers and the victims.
The world is full of people, some of which are suffering every day from pain. Even with the advancements that have been made with medicine, it’s not enough to cure many diseases or to heal a person’s pain. Euthanasia is commonly referred to as a “mercy killing”. It is the intentional act of putting a person to death quietly and painlessly who has an incurable or painful disease, it is intended to be an act of mercy. According to (ANA, 2013), Euthanasia is the act of putting to death someone suffering from a painful and prolonged illness or injury.
The right to life has been a subject of controversy for decades. We can mention it when we talk about abortion, the death penalty, and simply by a natural process we allow such as the simple act of natural birth of a baby. Whether a life is worth living? and whether to assist the act to end a life? Has been one of the most controversial subjects among the religious communities and the society. According to the Louis Finkelstein Institute for Religious and Social Studies reported on its website in the document "Physician-Assisted Suicide Survey," (accessed on Oct. 27, 2006), "Religious identity correlates with attitudes toward the ethical status of assisting in suicide. Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox Jews believe in the majority that it