The Choices Of Euthanasia By Peter Singer

1273 Words6 Pages
I do not agree with Peter Singer, for the most part. Some of the agreements he and Johnson talked about were and had decent topics. Unfortunately, the main topic I do not agree with at all, only under certain circumstances. For example, Euthanasia is the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in a coma. I feel as if the Euthanasia should not only be the doctors, and or parents’ choice of their children’s death. If they feel that their child will never wake back up from a coma or if they know that their baby is in so much pain, that they would rather be dead than to stay alive. Neither doctors nor parents should ever give up on them and just euthanatize them because they think it’s for the best for the…show more content…
Negative Euthanasia is defined as the withholding of life preserving procedures and treatments that would prolong the life of one who is incurably and terminally ill and couldn 't survive without them. “The word Euthanasia becomes a respectable part of our vocabulary in a subtle way, ' death with dignity '. Tolerance of euthanasia is not limited to our own country.”
Once a group of humans are considered unworthy of living, than why should our society stop extending this cruelty? If the mongoloid is to be accepted of his right to life, what about the blind and deaf? What about of the cripple, the special needed, or the senile? Courts long accepted the proposition that people have a right to refuse medical treatment they find painful or difficult to bear, even if that refusal means certain death. The right to die...As individuals, we have the negative obligation not to destroy or injure human life directly, especially the life of the innocent and invulnerable. It has been reasoned that the protection of innocent life- and therefore, opposition to suicide, abortion, murder, and euthanasia- pertains to the common good of the society. Euthanasia is advantageous in many more ways than disadvantageous. It can help
…show more content…
So if we turn to consider the infants themselves, independently of the attitudes of their parents.” He agrees that it is okay to abort an infant that may have a default before birth, so the child won’t suffer in pain and disabilities. It may still be objected that to replace either a fetus or a newborn infant is wrong because it suggest to disabled people living today that their lives are less worth living than the lives of people who are not disabled.
I strongly disagree with Peter mainly because, I have a sister who has some disabilities. She has cerebral palsy. Though she is not in pain, she was born, and she is loved. No matter if she wasn’t or didn’t have a disability she would still be loved and just like everyone else.
A lot of the times a child has a disability they are treated completely different from those who don’t. They may get made fun of and have rude comments towards them, but they are also loved
(sometimes even more).
Children are occasionally born with such serious disorders that termination of life is regarded

More about The Choices Of Euthanasia By Peter Singer

Open Document