Is this correct? Can it be said that people only get abortions to fix the steamy night behind the bleachers? That is apparently the idea behind abortions, yet it is flawed. Abortions today are more commonplace than ever before, and why is this? Because instances of rape, incest, and deformities are on the rise, and saving the life of a mother and father is equally as important as saving the life of a child.
If the insights of how humanity is best preserved change, the regulations will certainly change as well—even regulations which seem clear and unchangeable, As an demonstration, we might succinctly reflect upon the history of abortion. 8 In the period following the Great Spiral, there was a seen worry that human life might be snuffed out absolutely. Our numbers were small and the situation of dwelling were rough. At that time a human fetus was advised a "life in being" and therefore abortion was [pg478] universally accused as killing" under the laws. But after some centuries of community development and normal conditions, the regulations against abortion were respected more in the break than in the observance.
Euthanasia, currently a very controversial topic of discussion throughout Australia. The question is “should euthanasia be legalised, and if so who is legible to be euthanised?” It is currently illegal in Australia to be euthanised, however 86% of the public agrees that euthanasia should be administered to people who are willing to if they are terminally ill, and a surprising 54% of practitioners agree also. Even though this is the case, why is it still illegal? What are the dangers of euthanasia if any, and where do we draw the line? Euthanasia is the practice of purposefully ending someone’s life in order to relieve their pain and/or suffering.
Legalized euthanasia raises the potential for a potentially dangerous situation. Doctors could find themselves better off financially if a seriously ill, or disables person, chooses to die rather than receive long term care. I think euthanasia goes against the natural law inclination to survive, and that we must do what we can for self-preservation. If we begin to deem certain situations and conditions unworthy of living, there may be no need to improve the quality of life or medical care. Why bother?
Horace once said, “To save a man’s life against his will is the same as killing him.” Many have associated this quote with euthanasia: a painless killing of an ill and suffering patient. Being a very controversial topic on the legalization of it, euthanasia is illegal in most countries and states. National Health Service (NHS) Choices states that, “euthanasia could be regarded as either voluntary manslaughter [...] or murder.” Although some disagree, euthanasia should be legal because regardless of the situation, death is a natural occurrence and the patient should have a choice of when to end their suffering. Generally, death is a sad and often feared thing, but for some suffering patients, it is a want. “Terminally ill means terminally ill.
However, others choose to argue voluntary euthanasia, should remain illegal because it goes against the Catholic and Christian religions. There is also belief, voluntary euthanasia defeats the goals of a doctor's job. Some are concerned about the patient's sanity at the time and argue the patient may not be fully competent and does not understand what choices they are making. Others stress, if voluntary euthanasia is legalized, involuntary euthanasia will soon to follow. Involuntary euthanasia ends a patients life without their consent.
Is there really dignity in taking your own life? Or are you choosing to give up. Terminal ill patients feel they may loose this battle “life” so instead of fighting they would rather waive the white flag and tap out. Which to a healthy person may not make sense because the patient may have to move to a state that assisted suicide is illegal and go though all the legal work to get the permission to
It would allow for organ donation which would help so many other people who may not survive without a transplant. Also, most people know that terminal illnesses can force patients to endure a great deal of pain, and the prices of health care to treat that pain can be enormous. Both of these things are corrigible by euthanization processes. Above all, the government should be able realize that death is a freedom they have no right to deny any human being under any circumstances. For these reasons, physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia should be legalized on a federal level because of the advantages they constitute: such as the salvaging of organs, lower healthcare costs, and cessation of pain.
Secondly, legalising euthanasi... ... middle of paper ... ...espect for the patients’ autonomy and ultimately makes dying with dignity a possible option. I am a proponent of legalising euthanasia globally as I believe it will help not in quantity but in the quality of life of the patients and his or her family members. Works Cited 1. Gallup Poll, Angelfire, Nightingale Alliance. (2013, December 11).
Euthanasia occurs when a doctor directly ends the life of a patient himself; assisted suicide occurs when the doctor simply provides the needed materials so a person can perform the action themselves. “Euthanasia is used to protect the interests and well being of citiz... ... middle of paper ... ...oth necessary and wanted. “Assuming 2.7% of Americans, like the Dutch, chose assisted suicide and assuming their life would be one month shorter, would save the United States six hundred twenty-seven million dollars “(lifeissues.net). In conclusion, euthanasia and assisted suicide should be legalized world wide. To end suffering, to keep one’s autonomy and their desire to perform daily actions, and to prevent the fear of burdening loved ones are among many reasons people resort to euthanasia or assisted suicide.