The decision is made by another person because the patient is incapable of doing so himself/herself” (2015). Involuntary euthanasia can be regarded as murder (NHS). There are also two procedural classifications of euthanasia which are passive, and active euthanasia. Passive euthanasia is when a doctor prescribes a patient increasing doses of medication which can be toxic. Although, it is the not doctors intentions to harm or kill the patient, this is still the ending product.
Although there are some situations in which euthanasia could be exploited, my thesis will argue that it is not always morally wrong to end someone’s life in the circumstances in which euthanasia would be contemplated. The act of euthanising somebody can either be voluntary, in which the person believes their life is not worth living and asks for their life to be ended, or non-voluntary, in which they are unable to do so, and the decision on whether to end their life rests on doctors and family. Furthermore, there are different ways in which it could be performed: through medical intervention, (deliberately ending the patient’s life using medical equipment, such as through lethal injection), or medical non-intervention, (not making any efforts to prolong their life). Both will inevitably end the patient’s life, however, not
Similarly, the same group believes that legalizing euthanasia could lead to abuse and murder. On the contrary, supporters of euthanasia disagree that legalizing assisted suicide in all states would lead to doctors murdering and abusing patients because of the strict guidelines. Several safeguards and precautions are taken when it comes to the practice of euthanasia (Cockeram 7). Mental capability tests are ran to prove that the patient is mentally stable and capable of making the decision themselves (Coster 24). After the tests are inspected by medical professionals to determine the patient rational, the next safe guard is put into action.
Physician assisted suicide, although legal in some states, should remain illegal because it goes against religious and moral beliefs. “In physician assisted suicide, the physician provides the necessary means or information and the patient performs the act” (Endlink). Supporters of assisted-suicide laws believe that mentally competent people who are in misery and have no chance of long-term survival, should have the right to die if and when they choose. I agree that people should have the right to refuse life-saving treatments, written in the patient bill of rights. But they should not have the freedom to choose to end their own lives with the help of a physician.
The author states that the scripture mentions about miscarriage but it seems that the Old Testament or New Testament period did not consider abortion as a preferable option, primarily because God commanded the living and human being to have dominion over the Earth. It begs the question when and how humans came to think about abortion? As men and women, respectively, each one understand his or her participation in the reproduction and giving birth to children, I do wonder what made humans think about destroying a life, even though one want to avoid being judgmental in asking if the child is a human? Looking back at the Old Testament, and the first murder committed by a brother, one can compare the cause of killing. It is jealousy and fear of being better than the other.
Although there are many positive aspects of medically assisted suicide, there are also many negative aspects. Those who disagree with assisted suicide feel as though it is unethical. How is it ever right for us to purposefully kill another human being. As a health care providers role, it is their duty to do whatever they can to maintain the wellness of their patient. According to 8 Main Pros and Cons of Legalizing Physician Assisted Suicide (2014), all health care providers must follow the Hippocratic Oath, which in it states that physicians are unable to give deadly medications to a patient, whether requested or not and they aren’t allowed to suggest it to a terminally ill patient either.
It is an act of voluntarily or intentionally taking one’s own life. Suicide needs to be distinguished from euthanasia or mercy-killing. Suicide by its very nature is an act of self-killing or self-destruction, an act of terminating one’s own life spans without the aid or assistance of any other human agency. Euthanasia, on the other hand, involves the intervention of other human agency to end the life. Euthanasia is nothing but homicide, and unless specifically excepted it is an offence.
As of 2006, euthanasia is the most dynamic range of exploration in contemporary bioethics. 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
When suicide gets mentioned the first thing that usually comes to mind is someone who is very depressed ending their life. The thought of someone who is terminally ill wanting to commit suicide usually never crosses someone's mind because they are supposed to keep strong, to keep fighting their illness and stay alive. Jack Kevorkian was a physician who made a suicide machine specifically to help ill people who can't function normally to commit suicide, he helped around 130 people commit suicide. When people found out about jack kevorkian and what he was doing they were outraged, how could someone help another person end their life when you should help them have a life worth living? The people wanted him imprisoned and the people got what they wanted, he was sentenced 10-25 years in prison but was released after 8 years as long as he did not continue to assist in any suicides.
Life is never guaranteed and whether it is through an illness or an accident, we as humans are eventually going to die. Physicians Assisted suicide is one of the most controversial issues. The issue of doctor-assisted suicide has been the subject of the heated dispute in recent years. While some oppose the idea that a physician should aid in ending a life, others believe that physicians should be permitted in helping a patient to end his or her unbearable suffering when faced with a terminal illness. Furthermore, Physician-assisted suicide should be legal; it should be the patient’s right to decide when and how he or she should die.
It is believed that once practicing physician-assisted suicides becomes an acceptable concept in society, the next steps will easily be taken toward unethical actions such as involuntary euthanasia. Edmund D. Pellegrino, MD, Professor Emeritus of Medicine and Medical Ethics at Georgetown University claims that our healthcare system is too obsessed with costs and principles of utility. He defies the belief that the slippery slope effect is no more than a prediction, by reminding the outlooks and inclinations of our society. Furthermore, he believes there comes a day that incompetent patients and those in coma won’t be asked for their permission to use euthanasia. The Netherlands is another example of such misuse.
Over time, there has always been a debate whether assisted suicide should be allowed into society. Physician assisted suicide can be looked at as an advantage, but it can also be viewed as a negative thing. Assisted suicide is only performed by a physician when the patient is terminally ill, and only if the patient is willing to be assisted in suicide. This procedure is used with lethal doses of drugs prescribed by a physician. Since physician assisted suicide is very risky, there are a lot of precautions to be taken.