Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Legal and ethical issues surrounding euthanasia
Legal and ethical issues surrounding euthanasia
Legal and ethical issues surrounding euthanasia
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Legal and ethical issues surrounding euthanasia
For centuries mankind has dreaded painful deaths from either pestilence, attack or even accidents. Morris explains that the majority of people fear death because of uncertainty as well. He claims knowing death will be painless would relinquish man of fear of it (Morris 1). There is a way to know, for certain, that death will be painless. Euthanasia is the key to a painless death. In fact, the origin of the word is Greece where is meant, “good death” (Chaturvedi and Math 899). Although many believe euthanasia is just one thing, there are actually a few different types of it. The two main types of passive and active, but beneath these are two sub-types; they are voluntary and involuntary. Active euthanasia entails the introducing of something to cause death and passive occurs when life sustaining treatment is withheld. Voluntary includes consent whereas involuntary does not (899). Christian Research Institute researcher J.P. Moreland asserts, “There is no morally relevant distinction between active and passive euthanasia” (1). Many years ago death was seen as a challenge to beat instead of a release from the pain of life, but that is slowly changing (Cohen 50). Due to this change physician-assisted suicide recently has become a hotly discussed topic around the world. Milan Kundera, a famous czech writer, even noted that he feels the main advantage of dogs over man is the right to a merciful death through euthanasia (299). The debate has become so prevalent Dr. Cohen states those not aware of their stance on euthanasia should decide soon because they will be faced with the decision eventually (7). Today, many countries and even a few states have settled on the side of pro euthanasia by legalizing it. Despite these few places, most ar... ... middle of paper ... ...an be virtuous. Legalizing euthanasia is just another step. Works Cited Chaturvedi, Santoshi, and Suresh Bada Math. “Euthanasia: Right to life vs right to die.” Indian Journal of Medical Research. 136.6 (2012):899-901. Academic Search Premier. Cohen, Lewis. No Good Deed: A Story of Medicine, Murder Accusations, and the Debate Over How We Die. New York: Harper Collins, 2010. Print. Gula, Richard, and Derek Humphrey. “Legalizing Euthanasia: Medical Perspectives on Death and Dying” Santa Clara University. Markkula Center for Applied Ethics. 2010: Web. 9/17/13. www.scu.edu Kundera, Milan. The Unbearable Lightness of Being: A Lover’s Story. New York: Harper & Row, 1984. Print. Moreland, J.P. “Euthanasia Arguments” Christian Research Institute, 17 Apr. 2009. Web. 2 Oct. 2013 Morris. “10 Arguments for Legalizing Euthanasia” Listversem 12 Sept. 2013. Web. 2 Oct. 2013
People trust doctors to save lives. Everyday millions of Americans swallow pills prescribed by doctors to alleviate painful symptoms of conditions they may have. Others entrust their lives to doctors, with full trust that the doctors have the patient’s best interests in mind. In cases such as the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, the Crownsville Hospital of the Negro Insane, and Joseph Mengele’s Research, doctors did not take care of the patients but instead focused on their self-interest. Rebecca Skloot, in her contemporary nonfiction novel The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, uses logos to reveal corruption in the medical field in order to protect individuals in the future.
The word Euthanasia comes from the Greek and means “good death” (http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/hp.asp) and in the range of this paper, it will be called physician assisted suicide or “active” euthanasia. The definition of “active” euthanasia is ending one’s life yourself or with aid of a doctor. It can be done in various different ways; however, the most common form is with a combination of drugs, usually given by a physician. ( http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/hp.asp) The reason Physician Assisted Suicide (or PAS) is an important issue in this country and around the world is that there are many people out there suffering from debilitating, incurable and intensely painful diseases that would like to end their lives with dignity and without suffering. (Leo & Lein, 2010, The Value of a Planned Death)
Dworkin, Gerald. " The Nature of Medicine." Euthanasia and Physician Assisted Suicide: For and Against. 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1998.
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.
Euthanasia has been a very polemic subject in American society. Its objective is to conclude the life of a person at their own request, a family member, or by the determination of a health care professional to avoid unnecessary suffering. There is a lot of moral and ethics involved in euthanasia, exist a big difference between provoke death and allow death. The first one rejects life, the second one accepts its natural end. Every single intentional act of provoke the death of a person without consent is opposed to ethics and is punishable by law. One of the biggest moral controversies in the XXI century is the fact that some people agree in the autonomy humans have to determine the moment of death. The moral and legal implications are huge and the practical benefits are also enormous. This is a touchy and controversial issue and my goal on writing this paper is to remain on favor of euthanasia. I will elaborate later on my reasons to believe and support euthanasia, but first let’s examine the historical perspective of this moral issue.
Today, there is a large debate over the situation and consequences of euthanasia. Euthanasia is the act of ending a human’s life by lethal injection or the stoppage of medication, or medical treatment. It has been denied by most of today’s population and is illegal in the fifty states of the United States. Usually, those who undergo this treatment have a disease or an “unbearable” pain somewhere in the body or the mind. Since there are ways, other than ending life, to stop pain caused by illness or depression, euthanasia is immoral, a disgrace to humanity, according to the Hippocratic Oath, and should be illegal throughout the United States.
Conrad, Peter, and Joseph W. Schneider. 1992. Deviance and Medicalization: From Badness to Sickness. St. Louis: Mosby.
“Michael Manning, MD, in his 1998 book Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide: Killing or Caring?, traced the history of the word euthanasia: ‘The term euthanasia.originally meant only 'good death,'but in modern society it has come to mean a death free of any anxiety and pain, often brought about through the use of medication.” It seems there has always been some confusion and questions from our society about the legal and moral questions regarding the new science of euthanasia. “Most recently, it has come to mean'mercy killing' — deliberately putting an end to someone’s life in order to spare the individual’s suffering.’” I would like to emphasize the words “to spare the individual’s suffering”.
In this essay, I will discuss whether euthanasia is morally permissible or not. Euthanasia is the intention of ending life due to inevitable pain and suffering. The word euthanasia comes from the Greek words “eu,” which means good, and “thanatosis, which means death. There are two types of euthanasia, active and passive. Active euthanasia is when medical professionals deliberately do something that causes the patient to die, such as giving lethal injections. Passive euthanasia is when a patient dies because the medical professionals do not do anything to keep them alive or they stop doing something that was keeping them alive. Some pros of euthanasia is the freedom to decide your destiny, ending the pain, and to die with dignity. Some cons
In Sullivan versus Rachel’s on euthanasia I will show that James Rachel’s argument is logically stronger than Sullivan’s argument. I will present examples given by both authors regarding their arguments and also on their conclusions about it. I will explain both of the author’s logical strengths and weaknesses in their arguments. I will give the examples given by both authors on how they prove their arguments to be true and later I will decide whose argument is stronger based on their strengths and weaknesses. I will give one of Rachel’s main strong arguments and one of Sullivan’s very weak arguments. I will also show if both of the author’s premises follow from the conclusion. And at the end I will give my opinion on my personal reasons on whose I think makes more sense in presenting their arguments.
Because passive euthanasia is accepted by the American Medical Association in cases where it is clear the patient has no reasonable hope of living without the aid of a machine, passive euthanasia is not as controversial as active euthanasia. This paper will focus on the controversial morality issues regarding active voluntary or involuntary euthanasia, the ending of a persons life by lethal injection with or without the patients consent. Unless oth...
Euthanasia is the medical practice of ending one’s life in order to preserve their dignity and relieve extreme pain when quality of life is low. There are several methods of euthanasia of which people choose from. These methods include active, passive, voluntary, involuntary, indirect and assisted euthanasia. As of now, only a few countries have legalized euthanasia. The countries most known for the legalization of it are Belgium, Switzerland, and the Netherlands. In a recent news article titled “Why I Support Assisted Dying”, a Canadian poll revealed that 26 % of physicians would be willing to actually participate in assisted dying and that if euthanasia were legalized, more and more medical professionals would agree with it (Morris, 2013). In this specific article, there is some light shed on the issue in comparison to others which often put a negative spin on the issue. In instances where palliative care is not enough, physician assisted euthanasia is proposed by the article. Due to many of the negative stigmas attached to the matter at hand, many see euthanasia as a social problem which should not be carried out. However, there are plenty of reasons to rectify such attitudes. From a sociological perspective, a functionalist would argue that euthanasia should not be a social issue and should be legalized. Euthanasia is an alternative anyone should have the right to exercise to end one’s own suffering, maintain dignity and pride until the very end, and to free up medical funds that could be used towards saving other lives.
In James Rachels’ article, “Active and Passive Euthanasia”, Rachels discusses and analyzes the moral differences between killing someone and letting someone die. He argues that killing someone is not, in itself, worse than letting someone die. James, then, supports this argument by adding several examples of cases of both active and passive euthanasia and illustrating that there is no moral difference. Both the end result and motive is the same, therefore the act is also the same. I will argue that there is, in fact, no moral difference between killing someone and intentionally letting a person die. I plan to defend this thesis by offering supporting examples and details of cases of both active and passive euthanasia.
CRAIG PATERSON, THE CONTRIBUTION OF NATURAL LAW THEORY TO MORAL AND LEGAL DEBATE CONCERNING SUICIDE, ASSISTED SUICIDE, AND EUTHANASIA (Universal-Publishers 2010).
Kuhse, Helga. “Euthanasia.” A Companion to Ethics. Ed. Peter Singer. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 1991. 294-302. Print.