Introduction Today, medical interventions have made it possible to save or prolong lives, but should the process of dying be left to nature? (Brogden, 2001). Phrases such as, “killing is always considered murder,” and “while life is present, so is hope” are not enough to contract with the present medical knowledge in the Canadian health care system, which is proficient of giving injured patients a chance to live, which in the past would not have been possible (Brogden, 2001). According to Brogden, a number of economic and ethical questions arise concerning the increasing elderly population. This is the reason why the Canadian society ought to endeavor to come to a decision on what is right and ethical when it comes to facing death.
With all these different view towards euthanasia, should North American consider changing its law to legalize it? Euthanasia in North American should be legalized because it goes against the Canadian Charter of Rights. The doctors should have the right to decide when to terminate a life. The patients should have a part in their own death. Last, a few countries already agree with euthanasia.
There have been ongoing debates on whether physician-assisted suicide (PAS) should be morally permissible and legalized within Canada. This paper will explore why PAS should be legalized in this country, specifically with the purpose to provide patients with increased autonomy and authority of choice over life and death. I will also argue that this controversy should be seen from a sociological perspective instead of the suggested biomedical approach that focuses on the individual alone. Countries such as the Netherlands and the United States, who have both legalized physician-assisted suicide in some parts, will be used as examples and evidence in support of PAS. Not only will I present previous literature that explores this topic, I will also be addressing and refuting the objections that have been raised against this topic.
Many patients wish not to experience the worst of the disease at all, and Euthanasia and assisted suicide would give them the chance to end their life as they choose, and pain free. It is my hope that you understand my opinion on the topic, and where I stand on the issue. The general public and I hope to see Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide be brought into legislation in British Columbia. Thank you for taking the time to see my standpoint
Canada case was the revival because a group of Vancouver lawyers knew that the Sue Rodriguez case was not justified at all. Their main focus was section 241 of the Criminal Code which prohibits assisting another person to commit suicide. Through section 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, there was a violation for every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection. There’s violation because a victim of an incurable illness such as Elayne Shapray who has MS. Gloria Taylor had seen these Vancouver lawyers taking on this action and contacted them because it was important to her. She wanted to have the legal right to die with dignity.
Assisted Suicide: In Canada and Around the World Introduction Euthanasia and assisted suicide are very controversial issues all over the world. Euthanasia is defined as “intentionally causing the death of a person, the motive being to benefit that person or protect him/her from further suffering” where as assisted suicide is defined as, “helping a person kill him or herself.” (http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~cp28/euth1.htm) There are only four countries that allow assisted suicide. These countries are Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Switzerland. In Canada, assisted suicide is illegal, although Canada may be moving in the direction of legalizing it. According to Canada’s Criminal Code, assisted suicide is illegal with sentences of up to 14 years in prison.
Due to many of the negative stigmas attached to the matter at hand, many see euthanasia as a social problem which should not be carried out. However, there are plenty of reasons to rectify such attitudes. From a sociological perspective, a functionalist would argue that euthanasia should not be a social issue and should be legalized. Euthanasia is an alternative anyone should have the right to exercise to end one’s own suffering, maintain dignity and pride until the very end, and to free up medical funds that could be used towards saving other lives. Euthanasia is a sensitive topic and its sensitivity brings the world to a division.
For many, living in pain and not being able to do anything on their own is no way of living; and want to die to rest and put an end in their suffering. In many countries, this method is called Euthanasia, but is often referred to as assisted suicide. Unbelievably, in many countries around the world including Canada, euthanasia is illegal. Human euthanasia shouldn’t be illegal in Canada and should depend solely on the individual not the government of Canada. Two reasons why euthanasia should be legal in Canada are: Many people believe that ill people, debilitated for life and in torturous pain basically live no life and suffer every hour, day, minute and second they live.
In society today humans condone several things such as war and self-defence. Despite the acceptance of both acts euthanasia is still both illegal and prohibited in Canada today. Euthanasia is the intentional murder of individuals who are suffering from an illness, and often euthanasia is a personal choice chosen by the one who is ill (Medina, 13). Firstly, euthanasia is an act committed out of love and compassion. Secondly, euthanasia is typically a personal choice that should not be denied.
I have chosen to look more closely at the issue of active euthanasia, and that it should not be considered ethical, by Kantian standards. Those who support active euthanasia can argue that helping the ill to bring their own deaths, allowing them to determine the how and when, is not only a human act but also allows the person, who is "living to die," to maintain their dignity; this way, they will let them die in peace, rather than suffer to the end. Because if not, they think of themselves as a disgrace, to those they love. According to recent researches and surveys, many Canadians would agree to this, but my question is, have they taken a close look at the ethical debate? Those who are against active euthanasia would say not, and would argue that by participating in the practice of active euthanasia, they are "playing God," or perhaps, that they are not acting out of mercy, therefore, the act is nothing less than cold-blooded murder.