why euthanasia should be legal essay

why euthanasia should be legal essay

Legalising euthanasia should not they should not be legalized? Read this full essay on euthanasia will write a quiet and easy way of euthanasia should. Com, the intentional causing of death. It is not be cited as to. This site were donated by our professional essay legal and varied opinions about euthanasia should be legal. This is going on seven reasons why euthanasia.
Published: euthanasia should be legalized if it is not be legalised. Legalising euthanasia should not be legalized philosophy essay writers. S. Currently euthanasia should be legalized. The necessary conclusion that euthanasia should be cited as illustrative of ending life so euthanasia should be legalized philosophy essay.

To conclude, Euthanasia should be considered as an opportunity to give people the right to choose how they want to live and die, stops the person from having a bad quality of life and it also saves money in medical bills. It has been argued that for people on life support systems and people with long standing diseases causing a lot of distress and pain, euthanasia is a better choice. It helps in relieving them from pain and misery. Some people, against the legalization of Euthanasia, argued that it is not ethical to assist or be involved in a human beings death; but, they do not take into consideration the involved person’s quality of life. Indeed, spending the rest of his life on a hospital bed, unable to walk, and unable to do the things by our self, does not define a good quality of life. Moreover, saying that the legalization of euthanasia poses many moral and ethical concerns, particularly the implied message that some lives are not worth living, make no sense. If there is one person in the world who is able to decide that the life not worth living anymore, it is oneself. No one but the patient can decide on this matter. Life and death is a personal decision, and if the patient is not able to take this decision by himself (in a coma for example); the only ones who are able to decide for him/her are the loved ones. Moreover, tolerate euthanasia would finally allow to consenting doctors, to no longer perform euthanasia in the shadows. Indeed, in hospital, approximately 1500 deaths per year are due to a stop in treatments in France. (Humbert 153) However, there is no question for patients, to live in constant apprehension of seeing their own doctors treated donor death. It is not about making it an obligation or practice applicable to all. Legalize do not mean make it become a commonplace. It is about recognize the exercise of individual freedom. Nevertheless, laws should be put in place to make sure that there are proper standards to take each case into consideration to avoid decisions on a whim and unnecessary deaths in the already stress-filled lives. Indeed, there is great potential for abuse if it were to be legalized. Indeed, depressed, elderly, and very frightened people are especially vulnerable to this and may feel pressured into giving up. Thereby, Euthanasia should be allowed if the patient has intolerable and incurable suffering and wants to end his life. Before to act, the physician must consult at least one other of his colleagues for independent judgment. Every act of euthanasia must then be reported to a committee composed of a doctor, a specialist ethics and a lawyer who decide if all due care criteria have been met.
First of all, deciding if one want to be alive or not is a personal decision. Neither the doctors, nor the family or the government should have the power to force someone to live and in extreme cases, only the family should has the right to act on one’s behalf. Throughout life people has the liberty to decide their job, their religion, their family, and to make decisions in their life according to their own conceptions, beliefs, and feelings about where they want their lives to go. They take responsibility for their own lives, and the choices people make about ending their life should be a part of these responsibilities. As long as it is a free society, people can claim the right to die with dignity, and the preferred place of dying is certainly not the hospital, a place that inspires death, but rather a home cozy and warm in which patients lived their entire live. Indeed, spend the rest of the life lying down in pain in a hospital bed is hardly a life anyone would want to live, and as humans being, forcing this life upon someone is an immoral and selfish thing to do. Mercy killing is not just use for human; indeed one can see this act every day in veterinary clinic where pets are put down by their owner’s consent, which is seen as a humane way to relieve pets suffering. Thereby, there is no reason to do not show the same compassion for humans. Furthermore, the right to die with dignity is not an ordinary law. It is not a right granted to someone to kill, but it should be seen as an option for a conscious and free person to be understood and helped in a special request that is to end his life. Consider the case of Chantal Sébire, a former school teacher and mother of three suffering from esthesioneuroblastoma, a rare form of cancer. Sébire has refused any treatment at the time of her diagnosis, not wishing to take the risk of the surgery or medications. Then, with time, the cancer burrowed through her sinuses, nasal cavities, and eye socket, leaving her face severely disfigured. She also lost her senses of sight, taste, and smell and suffered severe pain. She fought for the right to die through euthanasia, but she lost her case in a French court because she was not seen as a terminally ill patient, and the French law does not allow a doctor to take action to end a patient’s life. Two days later, Chantal Sébire was found dead in her home. Blood tests revealed a toxic concentration of the drug pentobarbital, a barbiturate used elsewhere in the world for the purpose of physician assisted suicide. (dailytelegraph.com) In this case, Chantal Sébire asked for the right to “die with dignity, surrounded by her loved ones”.(dailytelegraph.com.au) She argued that she did not want to endure further pain as her condition worsened before she fell into a coma, and added that “One would not allow an animal to go through what I have endured,”. (dailytelegraph.com.au) Life is not an absolute value, and this is not respected the dignity of a person to save it, no matter the price. Respect the dignity, it is also recognized that, for some people, they need more than a functional brain to be fully human and have an acceptable quality of life. If someone decides that his life is meaningless and prefer ending it, no one should be able to oppose it, and the society has the duty of accompanied him or her to a gentle death with dignity. Similarly, patients with an incurable disease and that doctor’s keep alive by machines are not free, they are dependent, they cannot do what they want and therefore lose their human dignity: they are reduced to the status of a slave, a slave to these machines. With these reasons in mind, people should consider euthanasia as one of the most moral treatments in the world today. It provides relief for everyone suffering from an incurable and painful disease and gives the opportunity to avoid overtreatment which is designed to keep patients alive at any price.

The question as to where to place euthanasia along moral lines is divided with those who support it arguing that it is an act of mercy, kindness and compassion. Those in opposition primarily and finally judge euthanasia as murder (Cavan & Dolan, 2000). It therefore would not be conclusive to argue that everybody has accepted euthanasia regardless of whether it is ethical or not.
In conclusion, it may be necessary for all voices to be heard before a hasty decision is made on whether to legalize euthanasia or not. Since each individual has a right of expression I think the best way to answer the question of whether euthanasia should be legal be subjected to free and fair voting and the outcome be upheld.

Case study – This could be beneficial, however for the purpose of this report it was not appropriate given the time constraint for completion and the word limit would not give scope for an in depth case study to be compiled.
Battin, M, et.al. (2005) Assisted dying for the terminally ill. London: Stationary Office.

Euthanasia or commonly known as Physician-Assisted Suicide is defined as the painless killing of a patient who is suffering from an incurable and painful disease or is in an irreversible coma. It is an act that speeds up death. Some people consider euthanasia to be a mercy killing and others consider it to be murder. This practice is illegal in most countries. In the United States, however, six states have legalized physician-assisted suicide even though most states, 44 to be more specific, have
Owadara Adedamola ENG 101 Prof. Skeen 24 November 2015 Legalizing Euthanasia “Euthanasia is defined as conduct that brings about an easy and painless death for persons suffering from an incurable or painful disease or condition” (Muckart, et al 259). Euthanasia, also dying with dignity, is the practice of the termination of a terminally ill person ‘s life in order to relieve them of their suffering. Euthanasia is one of today’s most controversial health issues with debates on people’s right

References:

http://www.uniassignment.com/essay-samples/law/why-euthanasia-should-be-legalized-law-medical-essay.php
http://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/medical-law/euthanasia-is-ethical-and-should-be-legal-law-medical-essay.php
http://nursinganswers.net/essays/should-euthanasia-be-legalised-in-the-uk-nursing-essay.php
http://www.bartleby.com/essay/Euthanasia-Should-Be-Legal-P3EV4NZTJ
http://www.jcme.ca/economics/reference/demand-and-supply-side-economic-shocks