Christian Ethics Of Euthanasia

In Greek, Euthanasia directly translates as “good death”. Euthanasia is defined as performing interventions or administering medications with the intention of causing a patient’s death in order to relieve pain or suffering (Asch, 1996). There are many moral, ethical and legal issues regarding the topic of euthanasia. This paper will discuss in detail: the definition, history, current issues, effects of euthanasia on families, clinical practicing nurse perspectives and the American Nurse Association opinion on euthanasia.

Euthanasia, otherwise known as “mercy killing,” is the act of intentionally ending the life of a person who suffers from an untreatable or incurable condition that typically causes a great deal of pain (“Euthanasia”). The practice has been a contentious legal issue in the United States ever since Oregon enacted the Oregon Death with Dignity act in 1997, legalizing physician aided death (“Oregon”). To be more specific, the act permits physicians to prescribe treatment that will result in the death of a patient, if the patient requests it. After Oregon passed its act, California, Colorado, Vermont, and Washington followed suit and passed their own legislation legalizing the practice (“History”). To this day, the legality and morality of such

Currently in the United States only five out of the fifty states have legalized assisted suicide. Assisted suicide is the help from a physician for a patient to end their life because they have a terminal illness. Many people believe that euthanasia should be illegal across the board, however, people who have terminal illnesses should have a right to be in charge of how to end their life. Many people do not want their family to see them at their lowest, and they do not want to see their selves at their lowest either, therefore, giving a person a right to end their life peacefully, should be an individual’s choice.

Threatening to diminish the value of life is very dangerous. Euthanasia, also called mercy killing, is the practice of doctors intentionally ending a terminally ill patient’s life in what is purportedly a gentle and dignified manner. The term originated in ancient Greek and means “easy death.” Doctors perform euthanasia by administering lethal drugs or by withholding treatment that would prolong the patient’s life. Physician-assisted suicide is also a form of euthanasia, but the difference between the two methods is that in euthanasia, doctors end the patient’s life with lethal injections, whereas, in physician-assisted suicide, patients kill themselves with a lethal amount of drugs prescribed by the doctors. Physicians practiced euthanasia

Euthanasia has been a big topic of conversation around the United States for the past decade. There are those who are against death by medicine, and those who are for dying with dignity. Right off the back, the words death by medicine and dying with dignity sound a lot different. Those who are pro Euthanasia look at it as ending a persons suffering, and giving them a choice. People against Euthanasia look at it as either suicide or murder, and find it inhumane. Generally, the process of assisted suicide is done by a physician for those patients that are fatally ill with zero chance of possibilities to making a recovery and with great likely hood their death will be drawn out by the hospitals machines and more then likely

The argument that I am analyzing is found in Philippa Foot’s article Euthanasia. This specific section starts at the beginning on page 88. This argument starts once she talks about the true meaning of Euthanasia and the difficulty in how people see or perceive it. In Foot 's article, she wants to prove that an act of euthanasia is morally permissible, as long as you’re performing it for the right cause or reasons. Foot defines euthanasia as "a matter of opting for death for the good of the one who is to die." (Foot, p.100) She further justifies this argument by stating that as long as we put into consideration the interests of the person involved and only the benefits of that person that euthanasia can morally acknowledge. I believe that it

Assisted suicide is that a topic that comes with a great amount of debate. According to NHS choices, assisted suicide is the act of deliberately assisting or encouraging another person to kill themselves. Both active anesthesia and assisted suicide are illegal in the english law. Active anesthesia is when a person intervenes to end someone 's life, for example, by injecting them with a large dose of sedatives. Passive anesthesia is when a person causes death by withholding that is necessary to maintain life. Depending on the circumstances, anesthesia can be regarded at manslaughter or murder that is punishable by law. Under the terms of the Suicide Act (1961) assisted

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.

Euthanasia is ‘’the art of painlessly putting to death persons suffering from incurable conditions or

In this article author James Rachels highlights the true meaning along with pros and cons of what active and passive euthanasia are. Since the very beginning the author ensures that the reader can understand the difference between these two concepts. He uses multiple examples and facts to support his idea. For example, he mentions that active euthanasia is at times more humane than that of passive euthanasia. His thought regarding this is that, with active euthanasia the person is less prone to having a painful death rather than just letting a person go through the passive channel and just letting that person suffer and die with agony.

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. This prolonging of life brings about many ethical dilemmas in the field of medicine. One of the issues is patient autonomy. The practice of euthanasia has been established to put the choice back into the hands of the patient. To better understand euthanasia, there are five different types.

Those who wish to end their life early want to because they are in a paralyzed, vegetative state that restrict them from really experiencing life to its fullest, as well as feeling like a burden to those who take care of them because of all of the work it takes to uphold a debilitative life, and finally, those who wish to end their life simply don’t have good quality of life and would feel better if they were to be released unto death. I personally understand these wishes and believe that it really should be the choice of the

There are different euthanasia laws in each country. The British House of Lords Select Committee on Medical Ethics defines euthanasia as "a deliberate intervention undertaken with the express intention of ending a life, to relieve intractable suffering".[1] In the Netherlands, euthanasia is understood as "termination of life by a doctor at the request of a patient"".

The act of euthanasia, whether active or passive, is heavily obstructed in the medical field. Through medical ethics, the act of passive euthanasia is condoned by withholding treatment and thus, allowing the patient to die. Without any direct contact with the patient, the doctor is not considered as the cause of death. Thus, the medical field views passive euthanasia as of lesser and more permissible value in comparison to active euthanasia. In the statement made by the House of Delegates of the American Medical Association, they perceive this as contrary to mercy killing, as it is,

Have you ever imagined one of your loved ones suffering from a painful illness? Have you ever wanted that person to die and rest in peace? This is called Euthanasia, which means the termination of a patient’s life who is suffering from excruciating pain and a terminal disease. Euthanasia came from the Greek for good (“eu”) and death (“thanatos”) “good death”(Sklansky, (2001) p.5.) There are more than four types of euthanasia such as active euthanasia, which means that death is caused directly by another person by giving the patient a poisonous injection. Passive euthanasia refers to the withdrawal of treatment that keeps the patient alive. Voluntary euthanasia means that the patient requests assisted suicide, while involuntary euthanasia means that it is done against the patient’s will. Euthanasia started in both the Roman Empire and Greece. In ancient Rome, euthanasia was considered a crime and was taken as murder. In general, Greece accepted euthanasia for patients who are suffering from extreme pain. 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