A Rhetorical Analysis Of Euthanasia By Philippa Foot

Euthanasia: When it come to the topic of euthanasia, most of us will readily agree that it is a debatable topic. Where this agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of whether euthanasia should be given to end suffering. Weather some are convinced that there is better ways to go about pain such as hospice to provide them with more comfort, others maintain the idea that euthanasia should be given because people are free to choose how they want to die to end their suffering. My view is that euthanasia should not be legal because euthanasia is still a form of murder and ill people who are depressed tend to be capricious.

If they have to live a life of pain and suffering, with no way out other than even more physiological damage to the family and themselves, euthanasia should be legal. “Mr. Williams said "It's not a choice between life and death. It's a choice between different ways of dying."”. (Benjamin Preiss) Euthanasia is a heavy topic, loved ones dying by choice, and not by life. They don't put themselves in the shoes of the victim, they don't put themselves in the place of a mentally ill, or physiologically ill person, they see euthanasia as a bad thing, to take away the right to live and prosper.

Rachels acknowledges that “active euthanasia” and “passive euthanasia” are not the same, and more people should think of that before another person’s life is taken away from them (Timmons, 2016, p.

Euthanasia should be permitted everywhere around the world because all individuals have the right to determine their future either by choosing death or the right to live. For instance, in the novel Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck the companionship of Candy and his dog is very strong as they stay together all day long. Candy’s dog has become very old and weak in which he is forced to give up his life since he was no use. According to the text, “He ain’t no good to you, Candy. An’ he ain’t no good to himself.

They may only see it from the patient’s perspective and believe that she should do what is right for her if her quality of life has diminished and she now lives a life with little independence (Alters, 2008). She could decide on passive euthanasia, which is forgoing medical treatment that allows her body to naturally die, or she could utilize a physician to administer, or provide her with a lethal amount of drugs that will enable her to commit suicide (Alters, 2008). Either of these decisions for Joni would require assistance, the willingness of another person to help her end her life since she is unable to use her arms or hands due to her paralysis. Therefore, both of these people place their beliefs in the right-to-die, and then they view the body as destroyed by a disease that they perceive as no longer worth living (Humphrey, 2000).

His second argument is that as long as it is in everyone’s best interest, euthanizing a person is a morally acceptable act (Rachels, RTD, 352).

Euthanasia- Gay Williams Gay-Williams presents an opposing argument against euthanasia. This reading made me really think about my stance on euthanasia. I personally have mixed feelings on this topic. Gay-Williams states that euthanasia is “inherently wrong” and is starting to become more accepted. One comment I have is that as science is advancing and new remedies are created, this thinking might be changing for some people.

Hunter Blalock Mr N Bradsher English IV Honors Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. What about Death? Chronic diseases affect approximately 133 million Americans each year (National Health Council 1). Even more, are mortally wounded.

Euthanasia is usually used to refer to active euthanasia, and in this sense, euthanasia is usually considered to be criminal homicide, but voluntary, passive euthanasia is widely non-criminal. Voluntary Euthanasia is conducted with the consent of the patient while Involuntary Euthanasia is conducted against the will of the patient. Beginning with the philosophical aspects of euthanasia we must first understand the importance of the sanctity of life. Human life is sacred because God made humankind in His own image, and that each individual human

Many pro-euthanasia believers will use the autonomy argument and debate the opinion that patients should have the right to choose when and how to they want to die. In an article in the Houston Chronicle, Judge Reinhardt ruled on this topic by stating “a competent, terminally-ill adult, having lived nearly the full measure of his life, has a strong liberty interest in choosing a dignified and humane death… (De La Torre).” However, dignity cannot be measured by the level of pain or the speed in which the individual dies, because it is already a characteristic of a person’s worth as a human being (Middleton). Allowing a patient to live their life to the fullest until the very end is surely a more humane and dignified death then cutting that life short in fear of what it is coming through the practice of euthanasia. While death for these patients can be a sad ending, it does not have to condemn a person to a remaining life of sadness and negativity.

There are real case incidents in which a 14 year old girl suffering from terminal cystic fibrosis is asking her country’s president for permission to end her life. She had self shot a video in which she says “I am tired of living this disease and she can authorize an injection through which I can sleep forever”. The girl's video has sparked a broader conversation about whether euthanasia should be legalized in the largely Catholic nation. According to me we should let euthanasia be legal as there is no significance in keeping them alive against their wish as we don’t know how much they are suffering. Another incident is where the woman moved to Oregon where euthanasia is legal to take advantage of Oregon’s death with Dignity Law.

Plato wrote “Mentally and physically ill persons should be left to death, they do not have the right to live”(A General History of Euthanasia, (n.d.) p.1 ) Sir Thomas More was the first prominent Christian to mention euthanasia in his book Utopia. Then, in the 18th century, Prussia passed a law that reduced the punishment of a person who killed a patient with an incurable disease. In the 20th century, euthanasia became a heated topic among numerous individuals, who

In a few nations there is a divisive open discussion over the ethical, moral, and legitimate issues of euthanasia. The individuals who are against euthanasia may contend for the holiness of life, while defenders of euthanasia rights accentuate mitigating enduring, substantial respectability, determination toward oneself, and individual autonomy. Jurisdictions where euthanasia or supported suicide is legitimate incorporate the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Estonia, Albania, and the US states of Washington. CLASSIFICATION OF EUTHANASIA Euthanasia may be characterized consistent with if an individual

THE EUTHANASIA CONTROVERSY Summary Euthanasia has constantly been a heated debate amongst commentators, such as the likes of legal academics, medical practitioners and legislators for many years. Hence, the task of this essay is to discuss the different faces minted on both sides of the coin – should physicians and/or loved ones have the right to participate in active euthanasia? In order to do so, the essay will need to explore the arguments for and against legalizing euthanasia, specifically active euthanasia and subsequently provide a stand on whether or not it should be an accepted practice.

Imagine having to endure so much pain and suffering for a majority of your life that you would just want it all to end. Well, there is a way one can stop their own pain and suffering and it is called euthanasia. Euthanasia is the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease. The act may only be done solely to those diagnosed with terminal illnesses such as cancer, aids, and heart disease. Many people agree with the idea of euthanasia as it can help those who are suffering be stripped of all the pain they are enduring.