Communication
According to the Greek euthanasia , quite literally means "the good death." Advocates of euthanasia, offer it as a solution for the emotional, psychological and physiologic suffering of terminally ill patients. The type of euthanasia, which is presently under debate, is called "active euthanasia" and is defined as an act performed by an individual to bring about the death of another person. Advocates for euthanasia represent "the good death" as a welcome alternative to "the miserable life." However, euthanasia is not actively practiced because law According to the American Heritage Dictionary, euthanasia is defined as "the act or practice of ending the life of an individual suffering from a terminal illness or an incurable condition, as by lethal injection or the suspension of extraordinary medical treatment." Not everyone agrees with this definition. I have always believed that euthanasia was the human choice or nonchoice of ending another person's life because of the excruciating pain they are suffering due to an incurable disease. Some disciplines think that euthanasia should never be an option no matter what the situation. While other disciplines question the validity of the actions of the
The question is, is the good of the fatally ill patient a release from the suffering or the continued attempt to help that individual during their time on earth? In his article "A problem for the idea of voluntary euthanasia", Neil Campbell explores the question of voluntary and involuntary euthanasia as well as the ethical and moral constraints of assisted suicide. The main concern here is that we as a society will not abuse euthanasia as a way to rid the world of undesirables. Campbell feels that, in a sense, a dying patient asking for death is similar to a prisoner in that they are asking for death when, under different circumstances, they would not really wish to die. Legally, each state has the right to decide if euthanasia is legal in its boundaries. Normally, this would not occur but because the pain and suffering are so great, the prisoner will do anything to make the pain stop. Still others support euthanasia in all forms as long as it is performed for the sake of the sufferer. In 1991 a survey was sent out in Alberta to 1121 physicians 679 returned it completed 250 of the respondents (27%) indicated that they would practise active euthanasia if it were legalized 429 (50%) of the respondents thought that the law should be changed to permit active euthanasia . The feel that society will call for the mercy killing of those considered to be a burden on the human race such as those with mental retardation or incurable diseases, as well as those who are dying or are unable able to pay for medical care. Has their quality of life disintegrated so much so that they feel there is no other hope? In that case, the physician has to examine whether the person is clinically depressed and therefore not of sound mind for such a request. I believe that euthanasia should only be used where there is absolutely no other way to help the patient. If a state passes a law legalizing mercy killings, there is no question from the legal standpoint of right or wrong. From the religious discipline, euthanasia is wrong. One must also consider the fact that, unlike the prisoner, the pain will not cease for the patient simply because they ask to die, it will stop if they die. Foot also examines the question of voluntary versus involuntary euthanasia.
Common topics in this essay:
Neil Campbell,
Phillipa Foot,
Heritage Dictionary,
Supreme Court,
Gula Passive,
According Greek,
Review Church,
Larkin Vol353,
Hippocratic Oath,
Hemlock Society,
active euthanasia,
assisted suicide,
euthanasia legal,
physician assisted suicide,
one's life,
person's life,
involuntary euthanasia,
pain suffering,
physician assisted,
quality one's,
fatally ill,
voluntary active euthanasia,
feel euthanasia legal,
voluntary involuntary euthanasia,
quality one's life,
|
Acceptance Essays
