Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Pros and cons of euthanasia BBC
Religion and euthanasia
Religion and euthanasia
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Pros and cons of euthanasia BBC
Euthanasia is the act or practice of taking someone’s life that has an incurable illness or injury or assisted suicide. Benefits with assisted suicide are helping the terminally ill person to avoid excruciating pain, it also help their loved ones who are dependent on to avoid extreme health care cost, and health care cost can be spend on caring for and research for the future. If there are the pros for euthanasia, there are also cons against euthanasia. Those who are against euthanasia are mostly due to their religious beliefs or the fact that doctors will have the advantage to take someone’s life without giving the patient a chance to be cured from their illness. These pros and cons are main reasons why assisted suicide is such a controversy. When it comes to free will, people with an incurable illness have the right to choose to end their life to avoid a lifelong pain and suffering. In 1992, Sue Rodriguez was a great example of someone who decides to end her life because of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or Lou Gehrig's disease. Lou Gehrig's disease causes the nerve cells in the central nervous system to stop voluntary muscle movements. Patients who have the Lou Gehrig’s disease may have difficulty moving, swallowing, and speaking. Sue Rodriguez was suffering from this disease and she cannot end her pain and suffering based on Canada law that said assisted suicide is prohibited. Her belief about the law was that the banning “...violated the Constitution by curbing her rights of personal liberty and autonomy guaranteed in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.” (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/02/09/f-assisted-suicide.html#socialcomments). She took her argument twice in the Supreme Court of Canada, but sadly she lost both batt... ... middle of paper ... ...still make a choice on their will before they are in a vegetative state. Most states allow for this to come about. Euthanasia will always be a controversy in society as it is the same as abortion. I stand for euthanasia as it will benefit people more as no one would like to live through life with pain and suffering. Death gives meaning to life. “Any ones belief in life is going to be influenced by their interpretation of the significance of death.” (http://www.exampleessays.com/viewpaper/51503.html) People should not be afraid of death, as death is part of life. Works Cited "Jack Kevorkian." www.wikipedia.org. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Kevorkian#cite_note-5 (accessed May 11, 2010). "The fight for the right to die." CBC. Febuary 9, 2009. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/02/09/f-assisted-suicide.html#socialcomments (accessed Febuary 9, 2009).
There are several important ethical issues related to euthanasia. One is allowing people who are terminally ill and suffering the right to choose death. Should these people continue to suffer even though they really are ba...
Euthanasia is a difficult ideal to understand, to lack the ability to place a value on someone’s life and to understand someone’s suffering at the sometime. Being pulled by both your heart and your soul at the same time.
Do people have the right to die? Is there, in fact, a right to die? Assisted suicide is a controversial topic in the public eye today. Individuals choose their side of the controversy based on a number of variables ranging from their religious views and moral standings to political factors. Several aspects of this issue have been examined in books, TV shows, movies, magazine articles, and other means of bringing the subject to the attention of the public. However, perhaps the best way to look at this issue in the hopes of understanding the motives behind those involved is from the perspective of those concerned: the terminally ill and the disabled.
I am writing to you today with both the interests of the public, and my own interests, on the topic of Euthanasia becoming legalized in British Columbia. In a 2013 poll conducted by Life Canada the findings were that in British Columbia 63% of Canadians believed that Assisted Suicide be brought into place, and 55% believed that Euthanasia should take action, although some hesitated because of the numbers of non-consensual Euthanasia deaths in Belgium. Having Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide legalized would not only be able to help the terminally ill and physically disabled decide how they wish for their life to end, but the legalization would also save a lot of time, money, and resources in hospitals and palliative care facilities. Although some laws such as section 241 of the Criminal Code would need to be reviewed, Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide could potentially end some people’s suffering, and save money and resources for the province.
Who owns your life? In the case of Canadians, the choice to die is not in your hands…unless you decide to break the law. Sue Rodriguez, 42, from British Columbia, fought the Supreme Court of Canada, challenging the prohibition against Euthanasia. She lost to a vote of five to four. Sue later took her life with the help of an anonymous doctor. Ironically, Canada was founded upon the principles of rights, freedoms, and dignity. Why do our rights end when faced with Euthanasia? Does freedom from suffering not apply? How does artificially prolonging life respect human dignity? The act of Euthanasia poses many questions because there is an element of control. The following paper will examine why the control should be in the hands of the individual: Fundamentally, controlling one’s life should be an independent choice; additionally, the majority of Canadians are in favour of euthanasia; moreover, many arguments against euthanasia are invalid.
In this essay, I will discuss whether euthanasia is morally permissible or not. Euthanasia is the intention of ending life due to inevitable pain and suffering. The word euthanasia comes from the Greek words “eu,” which means good, and “thanatosis, which means death. There are two types of euthanasia, active and passive. Active euthanasia is when medical professionals deliberately do something that causes the patient to die, such as giving lethal injections. Passive euthanasia is when a patient dies because the medical professionals do not do anything to keep them alive or they stop doing something that was keeping them alive. Some pros of euthanasia is the freedom to decide your destiny, ending the pain, and to die with dignity. Some cons
The topic of euthanasia and assisted suicide is very controversial. People who support euthanasia say that it is someone 's right to end their own life in the case of a terminal illness. Those in favor of this right consider the quality of life of the people suffering and say it is their life and, therefore, it is their decision. The people against euthanasia argue that the laws are in place to protect people from corrupt doctors. Some of the people who disagree with assisted suicide come from a religious background and say that it is against God’s plan to end one 's life. In between these two extreme beliefs there are some people who support assisted suicide to a certain degree and some people who agree on certain terms and not on others.
Wickett, Ann, and Derek Humphry . The Right To Die: Understanding Euthanasia. New York: Harper and Row, 1986.
Our values, opinions and beliefs depend on what culture, religion and the society we come from. People who are against view euthanasia as murder and that we must respect the value of life. Those who are in favor of euthanasia believe that doing such act eliminates the patient’s pain and suffering. Also, the right to die allows the person to die with dignity. Euthanasia may involve taking a human’s life, but not all forms of killing are wrong nor consider as murder. It depends on the underlying reasons and intentions. If you value a person’s life and the cause of death is for the patient’s benefit and not one’s personal interest, then euthanasia is permissible.
The right to die movement entered the United States in 1980, when a man helped his dying wife ends her life. This man then found the Hemlock Society - an organization that would help terminally ill patients die in peace, and advocated for laws supporting physician assisted suicide. After this event, the movement took charge, finding itself being argued in court numerous times. Debates went on as more and more doctors were being charged with murder as they accommodated their suffering patient’s wishes to die with the method of euthanization - a painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable or painful disease. States began to propose legislation giving these terminally ill patients to be able to choose to die - and although many states rejected it at first, the matter still never left the courthouse. In 1994 the state of Oregon passed the “Death with Dignity Act” allowing “terminally ill adults likely to die within six months to obtain a prescription for lethal medicine from a doctor” - serving as a milestone in the right to die movement. In 2008 Washington becomes the second state to permit physician assisted suicide, and the year after Montana’s Supreme Court ruled that “doctors [couldn’t] be prosecuted for helping to hasten the death of terminally ill patients” (“1980”).
The issues in the euthanasia debate usually revolve around patients who are terminally ill and/or suffering intractable pain. The patient must fully think about every aspect of what euthanasia would involve. I think that once a patient is seeking to end his or her life due to illness; they must have a will in place and also note the reason why they want to end their life. Euthanasia does raises lots of worrying ethical dilemmas like in what condition euthanasia can be justify, is there any ethical difference among killing someone and letting them die, is there any right to end the life of an individual who is suffering from serious
Thus, despite the arguments against euthanasia, patients’ lives should not be deprived of well-being, comfort or dignity. “In the last stage of life, every person is entitled to a high standard of care and a stable environment in which his or her privacy is respected” (Policy Options, 2013). A lot of the time, patients with terminal illnesses are thought of as ‘better off dead’ or ‘not the person they used to be’. This is all the more the reason why euthanasia should be legalized in Canada. The government should relax current laws and allow doctors to participate in assisted suicide if need be and are willing. If people suffering with terminal illnesses want to die peacefully and not endure painful procedures or live off machines whilst also helping society out money wise, the option should be available.
Although some people believe that euthanasia devalues life, I do not agree because I feel that it gives the patient an opportunity to end his or her life by celebrating their life in the company of loved ones. To conclude, I think that society's view on euthanasia needs to be more open, and hopefully people will realise that it is a positive thing, and not just a means of a quick death.
Society’s major arguments in favor of euthanasia believe that first, human beings have the right to decide when and how to die. 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.
First of all, euthanasia saves money and resources. The amount of money for health care in each country, and the number of beds and doctors in each hospital are limited. It is a huge waste if we use those money and resources to lengthen the lives of those who have an incurable disease and want to die themselves rather than saving the lives of the ones with a curable ailment. When we put those patients who ask for euthanasia to death, then the waiting list for each hospital will shorten. Then, the health care money of each country, the hospital beds, and the energy of the doctors can be used on the ones who can be cured, and can get back to normal and able to continue contributing to the society. Isn’t this a better way of using money and resources rather than unnaturally extend those incurable people’s lives?