By government not allowing euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide they are interfering and violating patient’s personal freedom and human rights! Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide have the power to save the lives of family members and other ill patients. Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide should become legal however, there should be strict rules and guidelines to follow and carry out by both the patient and physician. If suicide isn’t a crime why should euthanasia and assisted suicide? Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide should be legal and the government should not be permitted to interfere with death.
Euthanasia can helps the patient in many positive ways.Therefore, euthanasia or assisted suicide should be legal all over the world. People who oppose euthanasia claim that it is wrong since it devalues human life. They say euthanasia is not different from murder because it involves killing a person. They think that by legalizing euthanasia, society would accept the doctor’s decision to kill terminally ill people. Besides, some doctors might then choose the shortest way out, helping people die instead of helping them recover.
If we agree that some people can choose when others would die this is murder in its entirety. Everything must be done to prevent death since life is valuable and desirable to pursue and possess. If one chooses to die this is termed as suicide and it’s not acceptable. It can be concluded that active euthanasia denies patients the right to live and should not be accept... ... middle of paper ... ...surers find euthanasia cheaper than extended medical care and due to this elderly people will be pressured to accept active euthanasia other than waiting for their day of death. Therefore, instead of active euthanasia palliative care should be considered since they do help in treatment of pain.
In my mind I don’t see anything wrong with a doctor helping a person that wants to kill themselves. It’s the persons right to live and if they want off our earth because of a disease or aging so be it. In the Non-voluntary case if a doctor sees the only way a person breathes is by medicine and machines and has no chance to regain normalcy in there life its probably be better off killing them. Even though killing a loved one will be hard but who wants to see that person suffer. I agree with Hemlocks approach on this issue.
They don’t want to prolong the inevitable, and be in pain for an unknown time period. I think that a person has the freedom to choose what they do with there life. And if that person is terminally ill, and is in so much pain that they cannot function as they did before the illness, they have the right to end their life in a dignified manor. I am not a supporter of suicide, but I do not think that euthanasia is a form of suicide. It is a way to die without suffering.
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.
A number of doctors have been accused of helping the terminally ill end their suffering, but one doctor in particular made a stand point. Dr. Jack Kevorkian is responsible for over one hundred and thirty assisted suicides. The doctor’s fascination with death began while he worked at the University of Michigan hospital, where he would photograph terminally ill patients to try to determine the exact time of death in their eyes. He also did this to distinguish the difference between a patient fainting, being in a coma, or actually being deceased in order to learn when resuscitation was useless. Not one to avoid distasteful ideas Kevorkian again caused pandemonium with colleagues by proposing that death-row inmates be used as subjects of medical experiments while they were still alive.
Euthanasia and Physician Assisted Suicide To die or not to die, that is not the question if you've been diagnosed with a terminal disease in America. The question is how. Should you be forced to suffer all the pain the disease brings, or should your doctor be able to legally help you die in a peaceful, painless way? That is the question that the Supreme Court, religious groups, physicians, and many others are trying to answer. The problem is that it doesn't have a clear answer.
You can inject the person so they can die without sorrow and pain, and take the risk of escaping the penalties. Or you can stand by the law and let him die naturally while he is pain and agony. Dr Derrick Summers believes that people should be able to leave this world without having to fight a battle that they know they are going to lose, even if it is against the law. He thinks that the person has a right to be injected if they are in a serious condition which they know that the patient is not going to make it. It isn’t just the law why people don’t inject people it is also that it is religiously wrong.
In other words, physician-assisted suicide is when a physician helps a patient end their own life by prescribing lethal drugs (Engdahl 16). Whether or not the patient decides to take the drugs is completely up to them. Currently, physician-assisted suicide is not legal nationwide, it is only lega... ... middle of paper ... ...e he still remembered his family. Works Cited Ebrahimi, Nargus. "The Ethics of Euthanasia."