The popular desire for assisted dying is beyond question, the main arguments is the right to die with the help of a doctor, at the time and in the manner of your choosing. Ending a human life is wrong because life is scared and the endurance of suffering confers its own dignity. For the legalization of doctor assisted suicide, dying is the first step on a slippery slope where the vulnerable are threatened and also where premature death becomes a cheap alternative to palliative care.
Mr. Ben was rushed to the emergency room in an ambulance, the doctors not being able to save him pronounced brain dead. Now, his family members want him on life support therapy with the hope of him coming out of the coma, the doctors with their knowledge…show more content…
Throughout the ages, people have argued that killing yourself is a logical thing to do when faced with unbearable suffering. Under King Edgar, an English ruler of the tenth century, suicide was not penalised (by the confiscation of the suicide 's property) if the deed was done because of ill-health or…show more content…
The idea is that ones the head of professional services starts killing its own citizens a line is crossed, which should never be crossed, and some dangerous precedents will occur. The concern is that a society that allows voluntary euthanasia will gradually damage its attitudes to include non-voluntary and voluntary euthanasia. Thus, it is argued in order to prevent these undesirable practices from occurring, we need to resist taking the first step (Roseland 28). In my culture, mercy killing is a taboo. The irony of mercy is funny, let’s say a criminal is sentenced to death for his crime, euthanasia is administered because by law a medical professional has to administer the medicine for the death of the person so what is the difference it helping a sick person, and killing a person. Their crime may not be the same the method of drug administration is the
Throughout the ages, people have argued that killing yourself is a logical thing to do when faced with unbearable suffering. Under King Edgar, an English ruler of the tenth century, suicide was not penalised (by the confiscation of the suicide 's property) if the deed was done because of ill-health or…show more content…
The idea is that ones the head of professional services starts killing its own citizens a line is crossed, which should never be crossed, and some dangerous precedents will occur. The concern is that a society that allows voluntary euthanasia will gradually damage its attitudes to include non-voluntary and voluntary euthanasia. Thus, it is argued in order to prevent these undesirable practices from occurring, we need to resist taking the first step (Roseland 28). In my culture, mercy killing is a taboo. The irony of mercy is funny, let’s say a criminal is sentenced to death for his crime, euthanasia is administered because by law a medical professional has to administer the medicine for the death of the person so what is the difference it helping a sick person, and killing a person. Their crime may not be the same the method of drug administration is the