The Complications Of Euthanasia In Mary Shelley's Frankenstein

1217 Words5 Pages
Beeeeeep. The heart monitor flatlined as the pancreatic cancer patient was injected with serum by the nurse. Through a painless procedure, his suffering was permanently ended. However, the precious life of this individual was also permanently ended due the use of one controversial technology: euthanasia. Mary Shelley, author of Frankenstein, takes a stance against such advancements; she chooses to compare technology to a monster because of the way it corrupts society. The use of Euthanasia relates directly to Shelley’s view of technology; in the discussion surrounding both topics, technological advancement is discouraged due to the major implications that it places on society and the user itself. As seen in Frankenstein, Shelley fears…show more content…
In terms of the effects that euthanization has society, there are many benefits. The most beneficial aspect of this technology is that it is comforting for family and friends to know that their loved one is no longer suffering from intolerable pain. Although euthanasia is used for all ages, parents have specifically spoken out by saying that “the best parents are the ones who let their children go” (Braw). In today’s society, instant gratification is a priority; people will go to any extent to make a loved one to get what he or she wants. The nature of today’s society is to view an immediate death as an instant resolution to life’s problems. This concept is specifically demonstrated in Belgium; euthanization acts as a way to not only put patients out of their misery but also “to maintain the right population balance” (Frederich). Scholars idealize Belgium as a model for future societies because it has proven to be successful; Euthanasia will likely be used to control the population of overpopulated…show more content…
Societies frequently reject the use of euthanasia because of the way in which it violates ethics. This is a major concern in the field of religion; along with other religions and religious leaders, Willem Velema of the Orthodox Protestant Church was “fiercely opposed” to the idea of euthanizing (Boer). From a religious standpoint, this procedure is wrong because patients and their families can act as God by determining time of death. Religion teaches that God keeps His children on the earth for a reason. After all, God puts certain obstacles in one’s life in order to make them stronger; resorting to death is a sign of weakness. Euthanasia is also opposed by many because of the way people take advantage of it. In Belgium, where Euthanization is legal, the number of medically induced deaths “has been going up” tremendously (Boer). In fact, “it has increased by an average of 15% a year” since 2006 (Boer). As numbers increase, citizens become desensitized to the idea, therefore, viewing it as a viable option in the face of pain. Although not as common, patients will reject euthanasia if it is an option. Obvious reasons include ethics and religious beliefs. Patients also decline euthanasia by holding on to one concept: hope. There is always a chance that a medical miracle will occur or that the doctor’s statement was incorrect. Observations
Open Document