The ideas behind this moral distinction is that in passive euthanasia the doctors are not actively killing anyone but they are just not saving the patients. Most people think that euthanasia can be justifiable, when the patients are facing incurable disease, undergoing suffer, terminally ill and requests for euthanasia as their last wishes. For instance, Somerville (2010) argued that it is important to respect the people’s right of self-determination and autonomy. In other words, people should have the right to choose their time of dying but the state have prevented and stop them from doing it.
Euthanasia If you had a terminal illness and were suffering daily, what would you like to do to change that? There is an easy solution to this problem, but most people look down upon it because they believe it is immoral. What I am talking about is euthanasia. Euthanasia should be allowed in these cases where a person is suffering and is probable to die soon. Forcing a terminally ill person to live when they would rather die than suffer is much more immoral than euthanizing them.
Therefore, many disapprove since it goes against the religious belief of a natural death. As a matter of fact, “Christianity believes that switching off life-support machines of brain-dead people is not wrong because it alleviates suffering so it is compassionate” (Argument for euthanasia, 2013). Although euthanasia is not universally approved, it remains as a common option for patients and their families. How terrible it is for those who get left behind. When people are faced with brutal dilemmas,
If euthanasia is legalize, there might be a concern which poor patients and their family members refuse to accept treatment because of the high costing in order keeping them alive while the treatment will not guarantee that the patient will be cure. Therefore, some the them might choose to refuse treatment or even their family members do not want to spend the money on the treatment. Thus , legalize of euthanasia will serve death sentence to many disabled, elderly citizens and terminally ill patient and it might not their own will. 3.2 Euthanasia devalues human life It is one of reason why euthanasia should not be legalize. Proponents of euthanasia believe that it will do not degrades life for those who are suffering from incurable illness.
In and of itself, suicide is never a good option. Truly, most suicidal people have a mental disorder of depression, psychosis, or bipolar disorder. Yet, there are some that have what appear to be a viable reason for physician-assisted suicide. As in the cases of cancer patients, terminally ill patients, and even quadriplegic patients. These patients often have a good reason for wanting to end their life, and their suffering, with dignity and painlessness.
Many people are diagnosed with a terminal ill disease that will cause them to be in pain until they die. Some patients do not want to be in pain so go into hospice where they are not given medicine and die slowly. Family members who went through that with a patient says it hurts when they are hurting and can not help them. The law ABX2-15 legally assist patients to commit suicide with prescription to end their suffering with some requirements. The law ABX2-15 should be passed so family members and the patients will end their suffering.
The Donald (Dax) Cowart case gave me more of an awareness of how important a patient’s rights are. This case established why listening to the patient is significant and how violating their right to refuse treatment can impact their future. Dax was severely burned and he would have died if he was not treated. The treatments were excruciating and Dax just really wanted to die. Instead of allowing him to refuse treatment and end his life the doctors told him they were going to treat him so he can have a future.
What will the doctors tell the family members of the patient? Something like, “We didn’t try to save his or her life because a machine said he or she wouldn’t make it”? That would be absolutely unheard of and completely unethical and many hospitals would have an insane amount of issues from the family members of those patients. Some may say that it allows a more effective use of limited medical resources, due to the fact that the patient would have to go under expensive procedures even though they most likely will not live. Although, every patient should be treated equally no matter their condition because one may never know that they may actually save a life against all odds, it has happened before.
One of the most adamant groups in favor of assisted suicide is the Gay Men 's Health Crisis. They released the quote "The fact that the circumstances of the disabled population are, as a whole, far less than ideal in this country, and are likely never to be perfect, is no justification for depriving those who have a terminal illness of the right to end their suffering. These individuals are entirely capable of making rational decisions." They feel that even though a person may be destined to die, they can still make rational decisions and should be allowed to have their agony put to an end (Times 2). But what about those in comas and permanent vegetative states, or those who are not mentally competent but still terminally ill?
People experiencing suicidal ideation or battling a mental disorder or substance abuse problem may neglect to seek treatment due to the embarrassment of the individual and their families. The plan designed by the U. S. Surgeon General and the NAASP desires to eliminate these feelings of loneliness and humiliation and replace them with the dissemination of encouragement in regards to recovery. This can be difficult to achieve when news stories, TV shows, and the Internet are giving an inaccurate depiction of suicide as a person’s only alternative. The media needs to send the message that help is available for all individuals regardless of economic status, ethnicity, or sexual orientation. Communications should outline where and how to go about seeking care and evoke a caring response from the community.