...Euthanasia, the painless killing of a patient, has been around since the beginning of The Ancient Greeks and Romans. They tended to support euthanasia, but from the 12 century to 15-century Christian views forbid the act of euthanasia. In the 17th Century, common law traditions prohibited assisted suicide. This is a popular topic that is being debated, however, no one has figured out a right answer for mercy killing; no one knows if it’s right or wrong to help with assisted suicide. Is it moral to end the life of a person that is suffering from a disease? Or is it better to let them live while suffering for what little life is left in them? One view that people have is that euthanasia is a bad decision because you’re killing the person and...
Words: 1262 - Pages: 6
...The words “euthanasia” and “assisted suicide” are often used interchangeably. However, they are different and, in the law, they are treated differently. Euthanasia is defined as intentionally, knowingly and directly acting to cause the death of another person (A New Zealand Resource for Life Related Issue). There are two types of euthanasia: passive and active. Passive euthanasia is an act of hastening the death of a person by altering some form of support and letting nature take its course, for instance, removing life support equipment, stopping medical procedures, or stopping food and water and allowing the patient to dehydrate or starve to death. Active euthanasia involves causing the death of patient through a direct action, in response to a request from the patient. A well-known example of active euthanasia is the mercy killing injection to Thomas Youk, a patient suffering from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, by Jack Kevorkian. Assisted suicide is defined as intentionally, knowingly and directly providing the means of death to another person so that the person can use that means to commit suicide (A New Zealand Resource for Life Related Issue), for example, providing a prescription for a lethal dose of...
Words: 1995 - Pages: 8
...“Why Euthanasia is Wrong and Should Not be Legalized” Euthanasia involves killing the patient to eliminate the pain, while normal end-of-life care involves eliminating the pain so that the patient can die painlessly, from natural causes such as disease or old age. Nobody is against eliminating the pain when a patient is dying, but everyone should be against killing the patient as a means of eliminating pain. Ending a patient’s life is not a humane solution to tragic situations of pain and suffering. A physician’s duty is always to kill the pain, not the patient. Proposing euthanasia shows a lack of confidence in the progress of medical science. There are no limits forced on the physician’s means of relieving pain. The means are many, accessible, increasingly sophisticated and constantly developing. In extreme cases, heavy sedation that puts patients to sleep can even be a last resort to sustain them through their suffering, until death takes place from natural causes. In treating terminal cases, there are no obstacles to ending or foregoing treatments considered useless or disproportionate by the patient or the physician. There is always a way out, even in the most complex cases. There are no taboo issues about death in the medical profession. The questioning of life-prolonging treatment, the withdrawal of useless or disproportionate treatment and the refusal of treatment by autonomous patients are daily events in clinical practice, addressed calmly and openly by practicing physicians...
Words: 410 - Pages: 2
...Euthanasia Nicholas A. Manuel SOC120 Intro. to Ethics and Social Responsibility Brandon Wolfe 24 June 2013 - You always here the ones that you love say, when my time comes to die, just kill me and don’t let me suffer. For some people this is easier said then done and to partake in this action will be assisting someone in his or her suicide, which has been also known as euthanasia. Euthanasia faces ethical problems that question’s the caregivers medical integrity, the common argument that God is the only one can take someone’s life, and the fact that it is considered murder. I will discuss which one of the three classical theories would resolve these problems, as well as discuss one out of three contrary perspectives. We don’t want to see our love ones suffer just as much as we do not want to see some one end their life. A decision that is life threating with any decision that is made. There are three classical theories in ethics that describes the reasoning behind ones actions or thought process. Those theories are utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics. The theory that would resolve the problem of euthanasia would be that of virtue ethics. “Virtue Ethics is an ethical theory that evaluates the morality of the person doing a given act, rather than the act itself. Virtue ethics thus emphasizes that the various virtues and whether a person reflects those virtues in his or her actions are crucial to moral evaluation” Mosser (2010). Where some believe that this...
Words: 1796 - Pages: 8
...Should euthanasia be an option for people in need? Known as the practice of assisted suicide by intentionally ending a life, euthanasia is a controversial and disputed subject, meaning easy or good death. Euthanasia’s medical definition is defined as the act or practice of killing terribly sick or injured people in a painless way or allowing them to take less than the medically approved procedures necessary to lengthen their life, for reasons of mercy. (Death Talk, pg. 101-102) Considered by many to be a form of murder being morally and ethically wrong by devaluing one’s life, euthanasia can serve a purpose. When there are no other alternatives to relieve suffering patients, they should then be allowed to have opportunity to choose euthanasia as an option. There are different variations of euthanasia known as passive, active, physician assisted and non-voluntary. Passive euthanasia is withdrawing life-sustaining treatments or withholding them with the slow intention of causing the patient’s death. In other words, a doctor can disconnect feeding tubes; turn off life support machines, not performing life-prolonging procedures, or not giving drugs to the patient. (Euthanasia: A Reference Handbook, pg. 2) Active euthanasia is the act of taking particular measures to cause the patient’s death, achieved by the request of the patient. Often times when it comes to active euthanasia, it is done by request. (Euthanasia: A reference Handbook, pg. 2) The difference between passive and...
Words: 1580 - Pages: 7
...The tortures of ill people’s pain are the reason for euthanasia. Euthanasia is when the terminally ill people want to end their life, this is also known as assisted suicide or mercy killing. Euthanasia is legal is some places but illegal in most, but there is much debate whether it should be or not. Euthanasia should be legal everywhere because it relieves the terminally ill people from their unbearable pain, and it is also violating their rights. Dr. Jack Kevorkian has participated in many assisted suicide with lethal injections. They were all from his patient’s request. These terminally ill people want to kill themselves but were unable to. Sadly has been sent to prison because of this. He has been in prison for eight years and has been released in June 2007. He has promised not to do another assisted suicide again. Kevorkian “I intended to do my duty, not murder.” The terminally ill people are in extremely and unbearable pain, physically and emotionally. Their wish is to be finally relieved from this awful pain. They are ill, suffering and may even end up being depressed. There is usually not any medication that can make them get better. There are medications to make them drugged out, and may feel less pain or even no pain at all, but who would ever want that? To be drugged out of your mind for you do not know how long! Also all these medications leaves side effects. It is just wrong and unacceptable. Not letting terminally ill people end their own life is violating their...
Words: 776 - Pages: 4
...The first consideration in writing a speech is the foundation. This begins with selecting a topic that is of interest. Euthanasia is either right or wrong, and this will limit the options when trying to persuade and audience. During the construction of the foundation it is important to analyze the audience. Different things to consider are age, race, ethnic and religious backgrounds, and social backgrounds. It is also pertinent to consider where the audience is in regards to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, and to build on where the audience lies. The final part of the foundation is to have a purpose which defines the shape of the speech. For this speech, the purpose is to make a claim of value and persuade that euthanasia is wrong. The next phase of building the speech consists of composing a thesis statement, developing main points, and gathering supporting material from credible sources. The last phase of developing the speech consists of separating the speech into major parts, outlining the speech, and developing presentation aids if needed. The major parts consist of an introduction, body, and conclusion. The introduction should contain an attention getter, significance and credibility statement, a thesis statement, and a preview of the main points. The body of the speech should be between 2 to 4 main points and three is ideal. The conclusion should review the main points, restate the thesis in a new and fresh way, give an application or significance point, and...
Words: 1532 - Pages: 7
... Assisted suicide or in other words euthanasia is the killing by an act of an independent human being for their own benefit. There are many kinds of definitions that one must argue the fact of, what is euthanasia. Well you would have to keep reading farther on. Euthanasia can either be voluntary or non voluntary, when it then becomes murder. But what it is not is that it's not euthanasia unless the death is intentionally. It is not medical actions or withdrawing treatment. But in this essay I will give you the most frequent pros and cons of this issue. My view is that there should be allowed assisted suicide. As many people might know is that many people are against euthanasia than most others. Some examples of people being against it would be that it demeans the value of human life, which the human life could have many different views as people understand the concept of actually doing it. Anyway, in many cases, many religions do not allow the potential suicide and the killing of others. Also it would violate the Hippocratic doctors oath. Some people also believe that someday a miracle might actually happen. Lastly people think that doctors are given too much power, and by some miracle might be wrong or unethical. Also people think that assisted suicide could be mandated for economic reasons. Wesley J. Smith, a consultant for the International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide, said that he could explain in three words why people should oppose physician assisted...
Words: 1003 - Pages: 5
...upon in today’s society as one of the worst things someone can do. I do not condone these things but when you think more in depth, is this not a part of life today? When can these things be wrong and immoral or just necessary? If some person or thing is suffering, is it right to ease the pain? Assisted suicide by a physician can help people that truly ask for their suffering to be over. Every person should have a choice. The first topic to bring up is the realization of how we treat our pets today. No person wants their pets to suffer if they are ill. Pets that suffer are put to rest in a safe and to our knowledge painless way. A question to ask is why do people care more about their pets than the people in their...
Words: 672 - Pages: 3
...saying that euthanasia is not morally justifiable, and some people feel that it goes against one's human rights, people feel that it is not ethical. There are many aspects that are included in the interest that people have in this specific topic (Brock, 2012). Some feel that Active Euthanasia is wrong because one is physically committing murder, ending a individual's life, and feel that it is wrong because it is considered a crime in Canada (Jecker, Jenson,2007). Many individuals are against euthanasia in Canada, however some argue that Passive is not wrong and Active euthanasia is, however in this paper I will be arguing that the two types of euthanasia are morally justifiable (Jecker, Jenson, 2007). I argue that Active,...
Words: 1060 - Pages: 5
...across the world? In this paper, I will aim to answer those questions. Is death bad for us? If yes, why? If death is bad for us, what implications does this have about the rights and wrongs of killing people? I believe that death is in fact bad for us, and I will argue my case in the following paragraphs. Perhaps the greatest reason that people fear death is simply because they do not want to die. However, just because a person does not want something, that does not make it bad for them. For example, a person may dislike vegetables and not want to eat them but that does not make vegetables...
Words: 1980 - Pages: 8
...Euthanasia is Morally Wrong. Name Comp 2 Instructor School The issue is that euthanasia is morally wrong. This is applicable to all human beings as life is held as precious and regardless of the gender, age or race an individual has the rights to self-preservation (Leone, 1999). Despite the fact that individuals have a duty to ensure that hey maintain their personal welfare, they also have a moral obligation towards other human beings where they should avoid the harm towards them. This is regardless of whether one knows them personally, or they are complete strangers. It is an obligation to offer protection in good health or sickness and mostly for those who are not of sound mind in the society. This creates a sense of responsibility and the need to have people care for others other than themselves. Another issue is that on medical grounds, euthanasia is still morally wrong as it is expected that the doctor should provide the patients with the sure and care for their health despite the situation. The family members are also expected to do the same and do what is possible to see that their loved ones in hospitals are given the best medical attention. Human beings learn that the fact that underlies all this is that we bring our loved ones to hospitals so that they are cured and brought back to their normal lives. Despite the time it will take and the resources, the ultimate goal is that they have to be cured, and their health restored as well. Doctors...
Words: 1748 - Pages: 7
...Before writing my article I read various articles and debate some opposing and some proposing the topic of euthanasia, the style model I used was also an editorial that extensively gives the readers the main idea of what Euthanasia is, it doesn’t necessarily take sides (for or against) it just leaves it to the reader to decide if it’s wrong or not, it was taken from the ‘Encyclopaedia Britannica’; the purpose of this text is for reader to adopt the view that euthanasia is seen different based of each and every individual. The aim of my article is to convince and persuade and also inform the readership that euthanasia is not murder but mercy killing. In terms of target audience ‘life. It’s not for everyone’ should appeal to both men and women that are aged 18 and above or generally anyone who is of age and is facing the situation here society is telling them that euthanasia is wrong or bad. The aim of a persuasive text is to influence and so there needs to be a close relationship between reader and writer. To ensure that my piece is persuasive and that it has a friendly but firm tenor, after the introductory paragraph I began to tell the reader stories and situations of real life individual to pull emotive strings. Throughout ‘life. It’s not for everyone’, I have tried to incorporate interesting examples of lexis, the most notable is repetition or antistrophe and this is demonstrated right from the opening ‘act of terminating and individual’s life’, ‘… whose life...
Words: 917 - Pages: 4
...J. Gay Williams: A Defense of Humanity Gay-Williams defines euthanasia as “intentionally taking the life of a presumably hopeless person;” hopeless meaning the suffering individual has very little chance of recovery and intentionally meaning the intention has to explicitly to be to kill the individual (Munson, 704). Hence, the term ‘passive euthanasia’ cannot exist, because the sufferer is “not killed…nor is the death of the person intended by the withholding of additional treatment” (704). However, here Williams assumes that the doctor’s intention when ending a treatment is never to kill the patient but always something else. After clarifying the term euthanasia, Williams presents his argument from nature that it is inherently wrong. At the scientific, biological level, it is natural for the body to work towards survival. Hence, survival is a ‘natural goal’. Euthanasia is “literally acting against nature because all of the processes of nature are bent towards the end of bodily survival” (705). By ending life, which is an end of nature itself, euthanasia is obviously unnatural (705). Williams does not stop there but further argues that euthanasia is immoral. He presents it more implicitly, stating that he “shall not employ this line of argument,” but he does still state it (705). He argues that since the body is an individual’s trust from God, by taking his own life, is acting against God. Hence, euthanasia is immoral as well. The crux of Williams’ argument relating to...
Words: 936 - Pages: 4
...mind would choose not to die with dignity. That being said why is it that so many people who would choose to die a good death are no allowed to. For some people no death is a good death, but that is silly because as everyone knows death is inevitable. No one can escape this fact. The controversy herein lies within the circumstances people who are suffering or lingering with a terminal illness that debilitates them such that they have no quality of life are not afforded the comfort of dying with dignity. It seems that this high merit is available to our beloved pets, but not our beloved family members. Aunt Bessie is forced to endure unrelenting pain from here incurable pancreatic cancer. No amount of pain medication is available to treat her pain and allow her to maintain consciousness. She knows her time is limited and she does not feel she should have to wait out the inevitable in such a terrible state. At the same time the family pet Bassett hound is found to have a mass in her intestines. She cannot eat and barely moves as she is in so much pain. The veterinarian has given the option of putting her to sleep or euthanizing her to put her out of her misery as she is suffering so. This sits well with most people. Aunt Bessie requesting euthanization though is out of the question. Why is the question that this paper will attempt to answer and why this is wrong will also be addressed? Euthanasia Defined Euthanasia can bring about different feelings to people depending on the...
Words: 2315 - Pages: 10
