"No palliative care, terminal sedation, or promise of effective palliative care can give Maynard the thing she treasures now.. the hope of gaining control over her disease before it takes her life." These were words by Barbara Coombs Lee, President of Compassion and Choices, referring to Brittany Maynard's assisted suicide. The assisted suicide has helped many, ones who feel that they can no longer continue lead with the unbearable pain of an incurable disease. However, there are people that are against this because "no one has the right to take their life." The "Right to Die" helps in many ways; having the option to not extend life by artificial or heroic means, allows people to die with dignity, and ends physical suffering due to an incurable …show more content…
Other people think that this is the first way to be uncivilized and that it creates a trauma to the family. Bob Dent, the first of four people to die under the Northern Territory’s Rights of the Terminally Ill Act, said: "What right has anyone, because of their own religious faith to which I do not subscribe, to demand that I must behave according to their rules". Bever, Lindsey said: "How Brittany Maynard May Change the Right-to-die Debate." People say that if God gave us life, he should be the one to take it, but none of us should be forced to live if the suffering is more that what the human body can handle. "For acts such as voluntary euthanasia that impact directly on an individual, the moral and humane thing to do is what is right for the individual, and only each individual knows what this is. Voluntary euthanasia is moral and humane because it is what the individual wants." words by Swanton, David. The euthanasia being voluntary is precisely what makes it moral. This is not a way to be uncivilized because people that desire euthanasia are terminally ill patients that are not physically harming other people and it is only for those that would not have recovery. As for the family, they could probably think about something they could have done or said to the family member who decided to have euthanasia, but could they have done something so …show more content…
With this option, there will be no medical intervention which could create unnecessary suffering. Why should people be suffering more and more each day with artificial or robotic technology when you can end that suffering peacefully and without heroic means. This right helps to not prolong the dying process for an already dying person. Not only does the ill person suffers, but the family suffers as much watching the person worsen day by day and knowing that the person is only alive because of artificial means. Trying to extend one's life is even more painful, not only because of all the procedures and medicines the person has to take, but also because the person is incapable of living a fulfilling life and the biggest agony is not knowing when it will be the day that the suffering would