Assisted suicide brings out some of the deepest feelings amongst human beings. It is a hard decision that nobody wishes to take, and is the power over life and death. Is killing a terminally ill patient justifiable? Who determines the worth of ones life? God or human? The answer to this question varies, as there are many points of view to this controversial issue.
             A physically handicapped patient may feel as thought they are a burden to their caregivers. A person who has had a car accident, which paralyses them from the neck down, is doomed to sit in a wheel chair for the rest of their life. They know that they will have to be 100% dependent on someone to care for them. The life quality of a terminally ill patient, gets reduced a lot, especially if they are not capable of walking or talking. The most strongest reason I think people are in favor of assisted suicide is because they do not wish to see their loved one, suffer. An advanced terminal illness conflicted with pain and hopeless disease will ultimately end in death. Is it not our job to prevent pain to others? The role of the criminal law is to prevent and punish anyone who deprives us of our liberty. The private harm principle is enforced for our protection and enables us to injure others. Does Assisted suicide conflicts with this principle? Is aiding the death of another person causing them harm or is it in fact preventing future pain and suffering?
             This is where criminal morality comes into play. What is moral and acceptable in our society varies among most people. Some people feel prostitution, homosexuality and drug trafficking as immoral offences, while other feel that it is permissible. One must look at the social institution such as schools, families or marriage that each issues can destroy. In relations to assisted suicide, I believe that if the disabled is a mature adult and is able to give his consent, no harm is being done. If the person h
             ...