Euthanasia as One of Todays Most Prevalent Ethics Issues

Euthanasia as One of Todays Most Prevalent Ethics Issues

Euthanasia can be considered one of the most prevalent problems when dealing with the ethics of patient treatment. Should people have the right to end their own lives when prolonging it will only cause them more pain? Should families who love someone so much, that they don’t want to lose them, cause them more pain by keeping them alive. What makes that more ethically correct then letting them die? The more you look into this issue the more you see how contradictory people are when it comes to making these decisions. This paper shows the issue in a more detailed manner, gives some background, shows the effects on modern society and explains briefly my standpoint on the subject.

The practice of euthanasia dates back as far as the dawn of civilization itself. In the past it was an easy subject to deal with because technology didn’t permit nearly as much life sustentation. When health problems, such as, diabetes and high blood pressure were causes of death, it wasn’t such a controversial issue in society. Now that we have the knowledge along with medical equipment to keep people alive, the issue has developed into a more difficult one to deal with. However, the issues surrounding euthanasia are not only of death, they are about ones liberty, right to privacy and control over his or her, own body. Currently under U.S. law, there are clear differences between the two different types of euthanasia. Extraction of life support, referred to by some as passive euthanasia has been exclusively upheld by the courts as a lawful right of a patient to request and a permissible act for a doctor to perform. Physician-assisted death, referred to by some as active euthanasia is specifically prohibited by laws in most countries and American states banning "mercy killings" and is condemned by the American Medical Association.

Active Euthanasia is thought of by most to be morally wrong and punishable by law. Yet, mercy has been held as a high moral by most civilizations in history. Now we punish anyone who assists someone else in suicide, out of their own mercy. During the 21-month trial period of a new law anyone assisting in a suicide can be sentenced to up to four years in prison and fined more than $2,000 (1). Physicians have been and will continue to be prosecuted for the murder of patients wh...

... middle of paper ...

...etroit Free Press (December 11, 1990)

-Herbert Hendin, "Physician-Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia in the Netherlands: Lessons from the Dutch," Journal of the American Medical Association (June 4, 1997 p. 1720-1722)

-USA Today, 1998

-Matter of Quinlan (http://www.csulb.edu/~jvancamp/452_r6.html)

-Cruzan v. Director, DMH 497 U.S. 261 (1990) (http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/88-1503.ZS.html)

-Exploring constitutional conflicts, “The right to die” (http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/righttodie.htm)

-Colesanto, D, “The right-to-die controversy,” USA Today (May, 1991 pp. 62-63).

-Derek Humphry, Frequently Asked Questions; Right to Die. ERGO! (http://rights.org/deathnet/ergo_FAQ.html)

-About Hemlock (http://www.hemlock.org/about_hemlock.htm)

- Alister Browne, Understanding Euthanasia: Should Canadians Amend The Criminal Code? (September 26, 1994)

-David J Roy, When the Dying Demand Death; A Position Paper On Euthanasia, (Undated)

-Mark Twain - The Tragedy of Pudd'nhead Wilson and the Comedy of the Extraordinary Twins

http://glory.gc.maricopa.edu/~mdinchak/eng101/argbioethics.htm#Assisted%20Suicide