She’s been struggling everyday of her life for the past 10 years; battling and fighting this horrible disease has made it hard on her and her family. The cancer has now metastasized, making it difficult for her to take care of everyday responsibilities and participate in daily activities. Her 13-year-old daughter is watching as her mother suffers and becomes brittle and weak.
Nobody wants to experience this great hardship, watching someone you love turn into almost nothing. I believe the concept of euthanasia should be legalized because of the pain and suffering to both the patient and the family, the cost of medications and treatments, and lastly because of the decline of quality of life for the individual.
According to the American Cancer
…show more content…
This pain then makes their physical appearance change, and sometimes unrecognizable. Euthanasia should be legalized; it is very hard on the body to go through this slow and painful journey that leads to death. According to Listverse, “Death is usually slow, painful, and undignified. By refusing people the “right” to end their own lives, we’re increasing that pain and indignity to a horrifying extent.” This quote shows how much pain and distress the patient is feeling, making it hard for them to live an enjoyable and fulfilled life. The legalization of euthanasia would prevent this, making a more humane death for the …show more content…
As covered previously, this would help the patients cope with their illness and the death process. Patients suffering with terminal illness deserve to have this right and freedom of euthanasia. Some might argue that patients wouldn’t take advantage of this legalization, but the suffering human deserves to have the option simply because of the freedom of choice. According to Terry Pratchett (a famous author who was diagnosed with a rare form of Alzheimer’s), “As I have said, I would like to die peacefully with Thomas Tallis on my iPod before the disease takes me over and I hope that will not be for quite some time to come, because if I knew that I could die at any time I wanted, then suddenly every day would be as precious as a million pounds. If I knew that I could die, I would live. My life, my death, my
Another reason a patient may opt to euthanasia is to die with dignity. The patient, fully aware of the state he or she is in, should be able choose to die in all their senses as opposed to through natural course. A patient with an enlarged brain tumor can choose to die respectively, instead of attempting a risky surgery that could leave the patient in a worse condition then before the operation, possibly brain-dead. Or a patient with early signs of Dementia or Alzheimer’s disease may wish to be granted euthanization before their disease progresses and causes detrimental loss of sentimental memories. Ultimately it should be the patient’s choice to undergo a risky surgery or bite the bullet, and laws prohibiting euthanasia should not limit the patient’s options.
Although physician assisted suicide may result in the fulfillment of another’s choice, be considered a compassionate mean to end suffering, or even be considered a right, I believe it is not morally acceptable. In the act of physician assisted suicide, a patient voluntarily requests his or her doctor to assist in providing the means needed for self killing. In most cases of physician assisted suicide, patients who request this type of assistance are terminally ill and mentally competent (i.e. have sufficient understanding of an individual’s own situation and purpose and consequences of any action). Those who have committed the action of physician assisted suicide or condone the act may believe that one has the right to end their own life, the right of autonomy (the right or condition of self governing), the right to a dignified death, believe that others have a duty to minimize suffering, or believe it (physician assisted suicide) to be a compassionate act, or a combination of these things. However, since this act violates the intrinsic value of human life, it is not morally acceptable.
Euthanasia is a difficult ideal to understand, to lack the ability to place a value on someone’s life and to understand someone’s suffering at the sometime. Being pulled by both your heart and your soul at the same time.
Up to 8.5% of terminally ill patients express a sustained and persuasive for an early death (Marks and Rosielle). Terminally ill patients have long lasting, painful deaths and they should have the option of assisted suicide so they don’t have to go through that. Assisted suicide is when a patient writes a written request to a doctor and after two days the doctor can prescribe lethal drugs to the patient (Engber). The doctor can’t administer them himself, that would be euthanasia, the patients has to take them him or herself (Engber). Assisted suicide should be legal because it ends patient's suffering and pain, and it is their individual right to determine their own fate.
Euthanasia, the right to die, death with dignity – no matter what you call it – should be readily available to all humans who wish to die. Euthanasia, as defined by MediLexicon’s medical dictionary, is “a quiet, painless death” or “the intentional putting to death of a person with an incurable or painful disease intended as an act of mercy” (----). There is one absolute certain in life – death. It is one matter that we have no choice in, we will all die. But shouldn’t we have some say in how, when, and where we will die? We are the ones who lived, after all. With the rise of support and advocacy of euthanasia, we might just be able to have some say in our deaths.
Anti-euthanasia advocates claim that assisted suicide is unneeded, meaning a person seeking euthanasia “should be forced to live regardless of the quality of life,” according to Dr. Philip Nitschke. He writes in “Euthanasia: Hope you never need it, but be glad the option is there” that a person should be able to choose he or she’s own outcome “to ensure dignity and choice.” Being able to choose our path in life is something that is granted to people in first world countries, such as the United States. Removing the right to choose if a person wants to die is not only wrong, but allows unnecessary suffering to continue. Dr. Nitschke believes that ultimately, “Unless modern medicine has a cure for Alzheimer’s [or] any number of the terminal illnesses that confront [us] will keep suffering.” Death is something that will happen to everyone, but suffering is not. While people with terminal illness do not choose to have the disease, they should be able to choose if they wish to elongate the
My claim: I argue in favor of the right to die. If someone is suffering from a terminal illness that is: 1) causing them great pain – the pain they are suffering outweighs their will to live (clarification below) 2) wants to commit suicide, and is of sound mind such that their wanting is reasonable. In this context, “sound mind” means the ability to logically reason and not act on impulses or emotions. 3) the pain cannot be reduced to the level where they no longer want to commit suicide, then they should have the right to commit suicide. It should not be considered wrong for someone to give that person the tools needed to commit suicide.
Legalization of Assisted suicide and Euthanasia would free those diagnosed fatally ill from an agonizing death. Some would argue that pain is manageable with strong narcotics, yet “Only 40-60% of pain … gets relieved …. about ⅓ of patients have pain that is intolerable, not controlled when it could be” (Wolfe n. pag.). And when pain is managed and, “the ravages of… diseases often cause incontinence, severe weight loss, dementia, nausea and other symptoms that...
Euthanasia is the fact of ending somebody’s life when assisting him to die peacefully without pain. In most cases, it is a process that leads to end the suffering of human beings due to disease or illness. A person other than the patient is responsible for the act of euthanasia; for example a medical provider who gives the patient the shot that must kill him. When people sign a consent form to have euthanasia, it is considered voluntary, involuntary euthanasia is when they refuse. When people are not alert and oriented they are not allowed to sign any consent including the consent to euthanasia. When euthanasia is practiced in such situation, it is a non-voluntary euthanasia. In sum, people who practice voluntary euthanasia in honoring other
As patients come closer to the end of their lives, certain organs stop performing as well as they use to. People are unable to do simple tasks like putting on clothes, going to the restroom without assistance, eat on our own, and sometimes even breathe without the help of a machine. Needing to depend on someone for everything suddenly brings feelings of helplessness much like an infant feels. It is easy to see why some patients with terminal illnesses would seek any type of relief from this hardship, even if that relief is suicide. Euthanasia or assisted suicide is where a physician would give a patient an aid in dying. “Assisted suicide is a controversial medical and ethical issue based on the question of whether, in certain situations, Medical practioners should be allowed to help patients actively determine the time and circumstances of their death” (Lee). “Arguments for and against assisted suicide (sometimes called the “right to die” debate) are complicated by the fact that they come from very many different points of view: medical issues, ethical issues, legal issues, religious issues, and social issues all play a part in shaping people’s opinions on the subject” (Lee). Euthanasia should not be legalized because it is considered murder, it goes against physicians’ Hippocratic Oath, violates the Controlled
The topic of euthanasia and assisted suicide is very controversial. People who support euthanasia say that it is someone 's right to end their own life in the case of a terminal illness. Those in favor of this right consider the quality of life of the people suffering and say it is their life and, therefore, it is their decision. The people against euthanasia argue that the laws are in place to protect people from corrupt doctors. Some of the people who disagree with assisted suicide come from a religious background and say that it is against God’s plan to end one 's life. In between these two extreme beliefs there are some people who support assisted suicide to a certain degree and some people who agree on certain terms and not on others.
The ethical debate regarding euthanasia dates back to ancient Greece and Rome. It was the Hippocratic School (c. 400B.C.) that eliminated the practice of euthanasia and assisted suicide from medical practice. Euthanasia in itself raises many ethical dilemmas – such as, is it ethical for a doctor to assist a terminally ill patient in ending his life? Under what circumstances, if any, is euthanasia considered ethically appropriate for a doctor? More so, euthanasia raises the argument of the different ideas that people have about the value of the human experience.
The right to life has been a subject of controversy for decades. We can mention it when we talk about abortion, the death penalty, and simply by a natural process we allow such as the simple act of natural birth of a baby. Whether a life is worth living? and whether to assist the act to end a life? Has been one of the most controversial subjects among the religious communities and the society. According to the Louis Finkelstein Institute for Religious and Social Studies reported on its website in the document "Physician-Assisted Suicide Survey," (accessed on Oct. 27, 2006), "Religious identity correlates with attitudes toward the ethical status of assisting in suicide. Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox Jews believe in the majority that it
In the following essay, I argue that euthanasia is not morally acceptable because it always involves killing, and undermines intrinsic value of human being. The moral basis on which euthanasia defends its position is contradictory and arbitrary in that its moral values represented in such terms as ‘mercy killing’, ‘dying with dignity’, ‘good death’ and ‘right for self-determination’ fail to justify taking one’s life.
First of all, euthanasia saves money and resources. The amount of money for health care in each country, and the number of beds and doctors in each hospital are limited. It is a huge waste if we use those money and resources to lengthen the lives of those who have an incurable disease and want to die themselves rather than saving the lives of the ones with a curable ailment. When we put those patients who ask for euthanasia to death, then the waiting list for each hospital will shorten. Then, the health care money of each country, the hospital beds, and the energy of the doctors can be used on the ones who can be cured, and can get back to normal and able to continue contributing to the society. Isn’t this a better way of using money and resources rather than unnaturally extend those incurable people’s lives?