The Pros And Cons Of Euthanasia

The definition of ethical is upright, honest, and compliant with accepted standards of social or professional behavior. Those people who think euthanasia is morally right believe that a terminally ill person has the right to seek mercy killing. While those who oppose euthanasia believe it’s morally wrong because it does more harm than good. Throughout this paper, I will argue that euthanasia is unethical and may lead to murder, the containment of healthcare costs and the diminishing value of human life. The role of the heath care professional is to maintain patient autonomy, maintain or improve health status, and do no harm (Sabatini, 1998).The healthcare provider’s relationship with the patient is built on trust.

Voluntary active euthanasia is when the person is completely aware of the lethal dose of a drug that will cause their bodies to go into organ failure, and eventually the person dies of an unnatural cause. Physician assisted suicide is a form of voluntary euthanasia. In many ways, this can be seen as morally acceptable because the person has full consent of what their choice is. It is a “humane” way to end a person’s life, as the person is said not to feel much during the period of time in which the drug enters the bloodstream. Those who believe in this system say that it should be accepted because you have full consent of the patient and it is done under the supervision of a medical professional.

This topic usually not a friendly dinner conversation (Suicide, Euthanasia, and Assisted Suicide). Assisted suicide is continued to be a debatable topic among Americans today. Whether death is a legal right or something that people should let nature take care of is still being decided. Although the topic of assisted suicide is not completely illegal in the United States, four states have legalized it in the past years. The states that are legalized are Montana, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington (Euthanasia Should be Legalized).

Secondly, they believe that it is cruel and inhumane to refuse someone the right to die, when they are suffering intolerable and unstoppable pain, or distress. Thirdly, Euthanasia should be allowed when it is in the best interests of all involved and does not violate anyone's rights. Finally, if death is not a terrible thing, then making it come sooner isn't a bad thing (life related issues). Also, they believe that allowing the act of ending someone’s life helps shorten the grief and suffering of the patient's loved ones. Similarly, senior adviser Faye Girsh from the final exit network said, "At the Hemlock Society we get calls daily from desperate people who are looking for someone like Jack Kevorkian to end their lives which have lost all quality.

She first analyzes euthanasia from the utilitarian approach. In utilitarianism, an action is considered moral if it maximizes total benefit and reduces suffering. Thus, if an individual is terminally ill, and a majority of family members agreed to the mercy killing, then the euthanasia is ethical. Mapes also contends that even if more family members object to the killing, “the Utilitarian…would ask what…[results] in the greatest amount of happiness. The unnecessary suffering of a family member that inevitably [results] in death [does] not produce the greatest amount of happiness.” (Mapes) Thus, the author concludes that mercy killing continues to be ethical in utilitarianism.

Physicians may feel euthanasia could be a merciful way to alleviate the pain and suffering of terminally ill patients and could provide an alternate method of treatment for end stage diseases. Society may view euthanasia as a way in which pain and suffering can be ended humanly for persons who are terminally ill. Bringing solace and peace to the terminally ill is something society should reflect upon and remember that one day they may find their family member or themselves facing this dilemma. Responding to this issue in a positive manner, and by agreeing upon the legalization of euthanasia, society sends a clear message to all people that their lives matter and if one chooses euthanasia, it is their legal right to do so. Legalizing euthanasia would spare families the agony of watching a loved one pass away in less than a dignified manner.

If euthanasia becomes completely legal it will allow a price to be placed on human life, and provide the mentally ill with a legal outlet to give into their disease. Even though a life stolen by euthanasia is supposedly painless, the pain endured by a premature death will live on in the hearts of their loved ones forever.

They explain that assisted suicide is a dignified way to die in order to preserve dignity and end suffering. The ones dying and are in need of assistance to die are “afflicted with excruciatingly painful and terminal conditions and diseases that have left them permanently incapable of functioning in any dignified human fashion. They can only look forward to lives filled with yet more suffering, degradation, and deterioration. When such people beg for a merciful end to their pain and indignity, it is cruel and inhumane to refuse their pleas” (Andre, and Velasquez). It is cruel and inhumane to ignore people who are suffering and need assistance to end that suffering.

The good thing is that the person receive physician-assisted suicide (euthanasia) does not have to suffer anymore. They will finally be at peace and not in pain. Anyone in that much pain under the right circumstances should have the right to have physician-assisted suicide. “The compassion argument”, “Supporters of euthanasia believe that allowing people to ‘die with dignity’ is better than forcing them to continue their lives with suffering”. (CARE 2010) However it is not okay for people without an untreatable disease or unbearable pain to commit suicide.

The Journal of Death and Dying defines euthanasia as < the synonym of the phrase mercy killing that involves either assisting in the commission of suicide or administrating painless and merciful death to a patient that is hopelessly ill> (Journal of Death and dying, 2015). What that “hopelessly” ill means is that there is nothing more for those people in this world, nothing more than pain for them and their families. Letting them go and find peace is an act of mercy and respect for their dignity. In the same article previously quoted we read that (Journal of Death and dying 2015) ; once again we see how euthanasia is a solution and not a condemn for people in pain. For a better understanding, we can look at a case of 1992 in which Dr. Cox had Mrs. Boyes as a patient.