The debate on whether voluntary euthanasia should be legalized has been a controversial topic. Euthanasia is defined as ‘a deliberate intervention undertaken with the express intention of ending a life, to relieve intractable suffering’ [1]. Voluntary euthanasia refers to the patients who understand the terms in the consent and sign up under consciousness, while involuntary euthanasia is performed against patient's wishes and some people may regard it as a murder [1]. There are two methods of carrying out euthanasia, the first one is active and the second one is passive. Active euthanasia means the physicians deliberately take actions which cause the death of the patients, for example, the injection of sedatives in excess amount. Passive euthanasia is that the doctors do not take any further therapies to keep the ill patients alive such as switching off the life supporting machines [1]. This essay argues that the legalization of the euthanasia should not be proposed nowadays. It begins by analyzing the problem that may cause in relation to the following aspects: ‘slippery slope’ argument, religious view, vulnerable people and a rebuttal against the fair distribution of medical resources. This essay concludes that the legalization of the voluntary euthanasia brings more harm than good. Legalization of euthanasia would also place us on a ‘slippery slope’. The ‘slippery slope’ argument, proposed by Walker [2], stated that if euthanasia is legalized, more immoral actions would be permitted and those actions might not be able to keep under control. One example is that involuntary euthanasia would start to happen after the euthanasia has been legalized. The Netherlands has legalized the euthanasia twelve years ago. This law at first... ... middle of paper ... ... and subsidizes their medical treatments when they are in need. Through these, the urgency of legalizing euthanasia may be decreased. Works Cited [1] R. M. Friedenberg, "Euthanasia," Radiology, vol. 221, pp. 576, 2001. [2] R. M. Walker, "Physician- assisted suicide: the legal slippery slope," Cancer Control : Journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center, vol. 8, pp. 25, 2001. [3] S. R. Benatar, "Dying and ' euthanasia'," South African Medical Journal = Suid-Afrikaanse Tydskrif Vir Geneeskunde, vol. 82, pp. 35, 1992. [4] P. Allmark, "Euthanasia, dying well and the slippery slope," J. Adv. Nurs., vol. 18, pp. 1178-1182, 1993. [5] C. S. Campbell, "Euthanasia and Religion," UNESCO Courier, pp. 37, 2000. [6] "Should euthanasia be legalized?" Br. J. Nurs., vol. 6, pp. 892, 1997. [7] Emmanuel EJ, “Cost savings at the end of life,” JAMA, vol. 275, pp. 1907, 1996.
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
Bernards, Neal, Ed. (1989). Euthanasia: Opposing Viewpoints. Opposing Viewpoints Series, Series Eds. David L. Bender and Bruno Leone. San Diego, CA: Greenhaven Press.
Gay-Williams, J. 1992, ‘The Wrongfulness of Euthanasia’ in Intervention and Reflection: Basic Issues in Medical Ethics, ed Munson, R., Wadsworth, Belmont, CA.
Euthanasia is a controversy that cannot be resolved from a single court ruling or a single person’s opinion. Many proposals have been suggested based on various studies and surveys. In “You Say Murder, I Say Euthanasia,” Clair Rayner describes a notable proposal regarding extreme euthanasia cases. The proposal, which has been put into the Science of Museum forum, recommends complex cases to be considered individually. In “Assisted Suicide Largely Shunned,” the anonymous author offers statistics that oppose the ethics of euthanasia.
Marker and Hamlon. “Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide: Frequently Asked Questions.” International Task Force. 2009. .
Potts, Stephen G.. "Euthanasia Should Not Be Legalized." Euthanasia: Opposing Viewpoints. Bernards, Neal. ed. San Diego. Greenhaven Press, Inc. 1989.
...t of The Remmelink Report and the van der Maas Study in Euthanasia, in Euthanasia, Clinical Practice and the Law. Ed Gormally L. The Linacre Centre 1994. p 219-240.
Henrickson, John and Thomas Martin. "Euthanasia Should Not Be Permitted." Problems of Death. Ed. David L. Bender. St. Paul: Greenhaven Press, 1981. 23-26.
The protection of life has been a foundation for many laws and social mores and legalizing euthanasia cheapens that protection. A recent challenge to this idea came in a London lawsuit when two severely disabled men claimed their protected human rights were violated because they could not choose how and when to die. The British Court ruled that while the current laws did not support the rights the men claimed, “the ban on euthanasia is justified” (Cheng 1). In this lawsuit, the right to live won above the so-called right to die because a law that was enacted by the people of Britain was protected. Had the case won, the laws that British voters approved to protect life, would have been cast away. Similarly in the United States, many bills to promote euthanasia have died once voters were informed of the debate. Initiative 119, which would have legalized euthanasia in Washington in 1991, at first show...
Euthanasia means different things to different people. The definition provided by www.euthanasia.com states that euthanasia is “the intentional killing by act or omission of a dependent human being for his or her alleged benefit. (The key word here is "intentional". If death is not intended, it is not an act of euthanasia)”. There are several key definitions listed on the euthanasia site such as voluntary euthanasia, involuntary euthanasia, assisted suicide, and euthanasia by action or omission. There are those who feel that euthanasia is an act of compassion at the end of ones life, while others such as www.euthanasia.com state that they “are committed to the fundamental belief that the intentional killing of another person is wrong.” The information outlined in this paper will help the reader to identify an understanding of what euthanasia is, how this practice is viewed by the rest of the world where the services are legal, the pros and cons, the affect it has on healthcare workers, patient centered experiences, as well as what patients use as an alternative to this practice.
Larson, Edward J. “Legalizing Euthanasia Would Encourage Suicide” Euthanasia- Opposing Viewpoints. Ed. Carol Wesseker. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1995. 78-83. Print.
In order to provide a framework for my thesis statement on the morality of euthanasia, it is first necessary to define what euthanasia is and the different types of euthanasia. The term Euthanasia originates from the Greek term “eu”, meaning happy or good and “thanatos”, which means death, so the literal definition of the word Euthanasia can be translated to mean “good or happy death”.
Euthanasia is very controversial topic in the world today. Euthanasia, by definition, is the act of killing someone painlessly ,especially someone suffering from an incurable illness. Many people find euthanasia morally wrong, but others find people have control over thier own bodies and have a right to die. A solution to this problem is to have the patient consent to euthansia and have legal documentation of the consent.
Kuhse, Helga. “Euthanasia.” A Companion to Ethics. Ed. Peter Singer. Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 1991. 294-302. Print.
There exist three different types of euthanasia: active, passive and voluntary. Active euthanasia refers to the process of injection of painkillers and sleeping pills in order to reduce the time of suffering of a patient by making his death less painful. On the other side, voluntary euthanasia refers to the case of the conscientious patient, who voluntarily demands from the doctor to give up on treatments. In this case the patient is conscious that he will die soon and regardless that stops the treatments. In my discussion related to whether euthanasia should be legalized or not I will refer only to active and voluntary euthanasia arguments.