The word “euthanize” means to bring about a person’s death to relieve them from serious distress. The topic of euthanasia in medicine has evolved since intensive care was first instituted. Before the 1950’s, a simple model was used to determine when someone was dead: the individual was dead when his or her heart stopped beating. In the modern light, the answer to this question isn’t as clear. With advancements in organ transplantation and other medical technologies, the stopping of a beating heart is no longer a definite death sentence.
An online article written by doctors Lisa Haddad and Nawal Nour states, “Some 68,000 women die of unsafe abortion annually, making it one of the leading causes of maternal mortality (13%). Of the women who survive unsafe abortion, 5 million will suffer long-term health complications” (“Unsafe Abortion: Unnecessary Maternal Mortality” ). Death and long term injury from unsafe abortions can be prevented, if those who do not want or cannot afford to have children have methods to prevent pregnancy from even happening. These deaths and injuries are important, because they are extremely preventable, and the fact that prevention is not openly distributed to the public is an injustice. The United Nations’ Declaration of
The word euthanasia is usually looked at with one of two completely different perspectives. For some people, euthanasia carries a negative connotation that is on the same level as murder. However, for others, euthanasia is an action in which someone is painlessly put to death, or allowed to die without any further treatment (De La Torre). Euthanasia, commonly referred to as ‘mercy killing’, is “deliberate action taken with the intention of ending a life in order to relieve persistent suffering (Nordqvist).” During their career, nurses might encounter patients who suffer with severe illnesses that may not be easily curable with medicine. In some cases, patients even fall under a coma, or prolonged unconsciousness, and only survive through the use of machines that keep them alive.
Unfortunately, doctor assisted suicide is not legal in the patient’s state, and he must suffer through his existence for one more month, if he’s lucky. Several states have already seen the benefits of a “death with dignity” law, such as Colorado, Oregon, California, and others. Doctor assisted suicide is a right that belongs to any mentally sane patient, because nobody should have to suffer through the pain of terminal illness, drive their family into poverty, and then die anyways. Cancer treatment, while vital to a patient who doesn’t have six months to live, is very expensive. In the article written by Matt Mauney, “Costs of Chemotherapy Treatment”, Mauney researched the costs of various cancer treatments, in order to give cancer patients an expectation of how much treatment will cost them.
Although 111 is not a large number, society has made a step in the right direction. Of course there are a plethora of people who believe it is a good system, but there are also people who think that doctors should be charged with murder. Sarah Edelman, who is pro euthanasia, stated, “During 2017, a bill to allow assisted dying for individuals with a terminal illness who face unrelievable suffering will be put before the NSW(New South Wales) Parliament. There have been more than 30 Voluntary Assisted Dying bills tabled in various states, and all have been voted down.” (1). The question imposed is how many people are going to have to suffer for politicians to realize that these sick people deserve to die with
It means that doctor and patient know and intentionally consent to give and receive a dose to end life mainly driven by a terminal and painful illness. The main factor that has driven this debate is that both are considered assisted dying and are an act to take the decision to intentionally end the life of a human being. It has generated moral, ethical (including patient, family and doctors), religious and legal dilemmas since many people see Euthanasia as a suicide masked as a mercy or compassionate death. The main difference is that euthanasia is considered a mercy kill or death because the physician administer a lethal medicine. However, in the case of PAS, the physician provides the dose or prescription for the self-administration by the patient.
Euthanasia is defined as being “the act or practice of killing hopelessly sick or injured individuals (such as persons or domestic animals) in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy”[3]. The practice of euthanasia is also translated from Greek, with the meaning “Good Death”[1] and has been present throughout human history for centuries, though not all societies during that history accepted it as an alternative to a life of suffering due to medical complications such as genetic deformities or incurable illnesses, as will be discussed in the review of literature. Medical euthanasia has also been regarded as assisted suicide and is considered illegal in many countries the world over, although legalization of medical euthanasia has been
A study done in 2007 estimated that at least fourth-one percent of the population in the United States has a living will (Coster 25). A living will is a document that states your plan for treatment if you are dying, including the request of euthanasia. Pro-euthanasia supporters argue that a living will gives the patient an opportunity to say how they want to go, even if the patient is incapable of communicating their wishes (Snyder 10). Supporters believe that it is wrong to keep a patient alive by hospital machines and medicines because that is prolonging the person’s death and bringing about more suffering. Patients who are living in a vegetative state cannot see, hear, or communicate, or feed themselves.
Euthanasia is a debatable topic that has recently gained a lot of attention. It is also referred to as physician assisted suicide. Euthanasia was first created and used for terminally ill patients or patients who live with very painful diseases. It is an option that some terminally-ill patients have considered and in my opinion, an option that every terminally-ill patient should have available to them. Euthanasia enables individuals to make a tough decision, but a decision that should be up to an individual to make; whether a terminally ill individual wants to die should be their decision without an outsider’s input.
Euthanasia, meaning a good death in Greek, is the practise of killing someone who is terminally ill to prevent them from further pain and suffering. The debate on the use of euthanasia has been on-going for the past fifteen years, after late president Nelson Mandela has asked the South African Law commission to undertake a project addressing the matters involved in end-of-life-decisions, as a result the End of Life Decisions Act was proposed but never passed into law. Many believe that if euthanasia were accepted as an option for the terminally ill we would be accepting that some lives were worth more than others and that murder is an acceptable way of dealing with chronically ill patients. However, euthanasia is not murder but a way of preserving chronically ill patients’ human dignity, by ending their pain and suffering through their wish to die a painless death. Section 10 of the Constitution deals with the issue of human dignity and states that ‘Everyone has inherent dignity and the right to have their dignity respected and protected.’ Therefore through the legalisation of euthanasia the human dignity of these terminally ill patients will be protected and respected.