You’re living a life of pain, suffering and anguish. You’re flat on your back, on a stone cold bed – 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. You have no control over your body. You cannot see, hear or speak to your loved ones. You’re dieing. Your inner workings of your body are slowly but constantly diminishing and there is no cure for your disease. Even at the best of times, life is a titanic struggle. Put yourself in this position. Imagine your life is one of pain, of suffering and of anguish. Better still, imagine your mother, or your best friend is in this very same position. You would want this person to be freed of these problems. You would want this person to be able to painlessly drift off into a deep sleep and leave there problems on there stone bed. You would want euthanasia to be legal.
Good afternoon distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen. I do not come here with pithy arguments. Rather, I come before you with a plan. A plan to rid Australia of un-necessary pain, suffering and anguish. A plan to stop our wasting of scarce medical resources on those who are incurable and those who have no drive to live.
Over the next 10 minutes, I will persuade each and every one of you that it is essential that euthanasia is legalised. I will do this by covering three main areas. These being the moral justification for euthanasia, secondly the economic importance of euthanasia and finally I will discuss the basic human rights of an individual.
The Research paper on Euthanasia Life Vs Death
Research Paper Euthanasia: Life vs. Death The word euthanasia is of Greek origin, which literally translates to mean happy or good death. However, since the beginning of the 19 th century, euthanasia has become associated with speeding up the process of dying or the destruction of so-called useless lives. No longer true to its literal meaning, it is now a practice of deliberating causing or ...
Ladies and gentlemen, my argument for the moral justification of euthanasia rests on the premise of mercy and compassion, two ideals which are essential to human dignity. In most cases when a person requests euthanasia they are suffering unrelenting and continual pain, and there is no reasonable possibility of substantial recovery. It is morally repugnant to watch another person suffer through humiliating helplessness and constant pain when one could prevent it. It is widely considered humane to put animals that are permanently physically impaired to death, yet humans cannot currently receive the same mercy under the law, even when they request it. When we are confronted with suffering which is wholly destructive in its consequences and, as far as we can tell, could have no beneficial result, there is a moral obligation to end it. This moral justification for euthanasia ties in with the economic wastages that are currently occurring.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is Moggy. Moggy was suffering from malnutrition and annorexia less than two weeks ago. Unfortunately, he was not given proper treatment for 24 hours due to there being a lack of medical resources available for treatment. Luckily, Moggy received adequate treatment just in time. If euthanasia does not become legalised then more and more people will be forced into consuming our doctor’s time and medical resources. Next time, Moggy might not be so lucky. Ladies and gentlemen, the reality is that we do not have an unlimited supply of medical treatments and it is because of this that we must prioritise. We must allocate these resources to those who have a good chance of recovery and a desperate want to live. We must legalise euthanasia.
Ladies and gentlemen, we live in a country that prides itself on upholding basic human rights. Rights to personal opinions, rights to voting and rights to religious choices. Yet in the midst of these human rights, the Australian government has chosen to deprive its citizens of the most basic right known. The choice to life. How can we, as proud Australians, claim to live in a “free country”, when we are not given the right to chose to end our own lives when it becomes so unbearable. How can we settle for so many elderly Australians being forced to live a life of pain, suffering and anguish?
The Essay on Meaning of Life and Australian Cultural Identity
“From separate catastrophes, two rural families flee to the city and find themselves sharing a great, breathing, shuddering joint called Cloudstreet, where they begin their lives again from scratch. For twenty years they roister and rankle, laugh and curse until the roof over their heads becomes a home for their hearts. ” (Winton, 1991) Tim Winton’s critically acclaimed novel, Cloudstreet is a ...
Together, we need to develop, establish and integrate safe programs that allow people the right to choose their destiny. It is about time the Australian government realised the legitimacy of these arguments and the reality that so many Australians are facing. It is about time Australians had the choice to end a life of pain, suffering and anguish.
So to conclude ladies and gentlemen, this argument does not rest itself on pithy themes, rather, it rests itself on the premise of mercy and compassion, two ideals which are essential to human dignity. It is not un-ethical or immoral to legalise euthanasia. Rather it is immoral to give patients no option but to endure a life of pain, of suffering and of anguish. As Martin Luther King once said “I am not sure I would have wanted my children to live a life of torment and abuse, so I dared to stop it.” Let’s not force our children to endure this same suffering if they are terminally ill without a cure, let’s give them the chance for peace and happiness, let’s give our children a choice.
