I started off writing this paper just for an English assignment but now I truly do support this cause. I hope from this article people gain some knowledge and can see how wrong it is for the government to force a person that is in unbelievable pain to endure life if they really do not want to. Sue Rodriguez was a mother in her early thirties who was going to die a slow and agonizing death due to Lou Gehrig’s disease. She lived her life for several years with the knowledge that one day her muscles would one by one waste away, and finally a fateful day would come when she would be fully conscious and choke to death.
She begged the courts to allow her doctor to help her in choosing a moment of death, but they refused. Euthanasia is a physician or others ‘killing’ of a suffering patient in attempt to hasten death and alleviate pain. In the game of life and death: life is the most obvious answer one would think. This is not always the case, so euthanasia or assisted suicide is an extremely controversial topic of today. It has many wondering if death really is the answer is some cases. What if one finds themselves terminally ill, in excruciating pain, and no longer wishes to waste their life withering away in a hospital bed.
Due to these reasons, certain forms of assisted suicide should be considered legal. Euthanasia is advantageous in many more ways than disadvantageous. It can help a patient in numerous ways: it can stop suffering and cause an impending death to come sooner and thus save a lot of heartache and pain. It is a fact that there are many diseases out there that can cause a patient excruciating amount of pain. For instance, blood cancer can include symptoms such as bone fractures, repeated infections, and persisting bruises.
The Essay on Assisted Suicide Patient Euthanasia Medical
Physician-Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia Should physicians be granted the power to intentionally end the lives of their patients? Recent proposals to legalize physician-assisted suicide have raised this question and triggered intense legal, medical and social debate. For some individuals, the debate is fueled by their fear that medical technology may someday keep them alive past the time of ...
If a patient tries every possible way to fight a disease but hits a dead end, it will simply be better to meet death in a dignified manner than die in a hospital bed not recognizing the person you’ve withered away to. Life is hard to live with any sort of terminal illness, in many cases death may be the better answer. Not letting people practice Euthanasia goes against the freedom promised in America. Every person in this country has rights: a right to speech, learn, love, live, so they should have a right to die as well.
If a terminally ill person wants to avoid excruciating pain and wants to end their life in a dignified manner, it is implied in the concept of ordered liberty. The right to exercise euthanasia is something one can choose for themselves and the courts should have as much a say in this matter as they do in matters such as marriage, family relationships, procreation, and the refusal or termination of life-saving medical treatment. We are said to live in a free country where we can make our own decisions, but are we really free if we cannot even make the choice to live or not live our own lives.
The ideas against Euthanasia or assisted suicide are flawed in several different ways. First of all, the Hippocratic Oath very clearly states: “I will neither prescribe nor administer a lethal dose of medicine to any patient” Although, it never says anything about using passive Euthanasia which means withholding common treatments such as antibiotics and other treatments for the continuance of life. Also, the Oath has been changed many times throughout history so what is different now. Before, the oath prohibited the cutting open of a patient, but now surgery is used worldwide.
The oath can be altered to fit the reality of the time. Second of all, in a society of people obsessed with the cost of health care, Euthanasia is regarded with the dangers of a slippery slope. Arguments with the “slippery slope” state that if voluntary euthanasia is legalized, eventually non-voluntary euthanasia will be legalized as well. The idea of slippery slope does not stand strong with facts because there is nothing that corroborates the idea that legalizing one type of Euthanasia will lead to the legalization of all types of Euthanasia.
The Term Paper on Euthanasia – Whose Life is it Anyway?
EuthanasiaWhose Life is it Anyway?The issue of euthanasia has become progressively known about in America as well as in many other countries. There are many different questions that are asked about the legalization of euthanasia. One specific question frequently asked about euthanasia is whose decision should it be to end a life?People's judgments about euthanasia are based on misunderstanding of ...
All of the disadvantages against this practice are controversial and can be rebutted. In the end, death is a tangible option for those who are suffering and do not see life as an option any longer. Many see it as inhumane and religiously wrong, but we must see it from the eyes of the patient. We are promised rights in this country, and the right to die should be right up there with the right to live. Due to these reasons, certain forms of assisted suicide should be considered legal.
