Of course, it is really hard to fight back the pains and endure it. However, people still want to live as long as they can. Euthanasia is nothing less than forcefully ending ones life. Legalized euthanasia would not be effective because some people will ask to die by pressure, some irresponsible doctors would let the patients die or kill them and it will ruin the future of medical advancement. Works Cited “Doctors and power”.
Since the quality of life can only be determined by the individual, directives allow individuals, or should they become incompetent, their families to express their preferences (Roberts, 23). Because only the individual or their families can decide what that particular persons quality is they should have the right to choose if euthanasia is an option. For those who suffer from terminal illnesses, euthanasia would be a way to escape from intolerable pain that cannot be alleviated by pain relieving drugs (Minois, 131). However those who oppose euthanasia believe that if a person has a terminal illness that person should not be assisted in death and should have as much aid in staying alive as possible. They believe that as long as the brain is ... ... middle of paper ... ... would also give people a chance to say goodbye to their loved ones.
"In Latest Suicide Trial, Kervorkian Asserts 'Duty as a Doctor'." Newsweek. May, 1996: 16. Smith, Wesley. "Depressed?
2277) and “Those whose lives are diminished or weakened deserve special respect. Sick or handicapped persons should be helped to lead lives as normal as possible” (CCC par. 2276). In conclusion, euthanasia should not be allowed. It defies the worth of human lives with excuses such as medical resource shortages or unaffordable treatments when humans are supposed to be valued, disregarding physical appearance and internal health.
We are morally entitled to die if we really wish to but giving the option to may cause more harm than good to a person. A person may have never thought of dying until the doctor brings it up, then all of a sudden it becomes an option and the patient could feel pressured to go along with the process to be euthanized. He or she might have never thought about ending their life, they might have just thought that their only option is to stay alive and fight for their life. Velleman argues that it can make someone worse off because he sees that giving someone the option to die denies him or her the possibility of staying alive by default. An example he uses to justify this is one of Dworkin’s, The example Dworkin uses is the one of a cashier working at a convenience store during a night shift.
Or perhaps, those who are a responsible for their relative or loved one under physician care can possibly be pressured into accepting to euthanasia as the last resort, regardless if they want it or not. In other words, Human life will be at stake. The value and sanctity of life will lose its importance. Even if someone wishes for it they should keep their faith in God and continue living as this suffering will be rewarded in the life after. Besides, one never knows when a new treatment will be available to cure a terminal illness.
Patients shouldn’t have to experience the fear of being “trapped” on life support with “no control” (Manning 27). They should be permitted the opportunity to die with a sense of pride and dignity, not shame, pain and suffrage. To make anyone live longer against their will and is simply immoral. By denying patient the option of euthanasia and physician assisted suicide the government is vi... ... middle of paper ... ...ns. Patients should not be so medically ill that they are unable to make this decision.
Even though this is the case, everything that you do affects other people whether it is family or friends. People who are considering being euthanised need to realise the effects of this difficult decision, but this cannot always be done, so keeping euthanasia illegal prevents this from occurring. Euthanasia is a problem. We cannot control it properly, abide by the rules of it correctly, can manipulate and persuade people in undertaking it. There is too much at risk and not nearly enough proper awareness of the mass effects it has not he whole world.
Many people would not be able to, and that is why euthanasia is an important choice to have. It would prevent the family from a lifetime of suffering because the family would not have to see the ill person suffer and they would know that they did the right thing by ending the misery. The major advantage of euthanasia is that it prevents a person from having to endure the rest of their life in pain. There is no appropriate reason that a person who is suffering from an incurable disease or condition should have to spend the rest of his or her life that way. If their family agrees with them, then the patient’s suffering should be put to an end.
Should someone suffering be given the choice to either hang on and let nature run its course or embrace death and face it without prolonging the pain. Many would argue the choice to end one’s own life would be immoral and defy the laws of God and that one who suggests taking their own life is in need of emotional or spiritual intervention. But one cannot fully grasp the emotions experienced when facing one’s own death, making the question of the morality of assisted suicide hard to weigh-. For me, humanity is what it all comes down to. When seeing a pet suffer from either illness or injury, the humane thing to do is to end their suffering.