ASSISTED SUICE AND EUTHANASIA
Assisted Suicide the act or practice of helping in taking the life of one who willfully wants to die. Just by definition alone it becomes painfully obvious; this is going to be a controversial subject. A term that goes hand and hand with assisted suicide, one in which I will be discussing at great length is Euthanasia. That is the act or practice of killing or permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured individuals (as persons or domestic animals) in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy. The term is from a Greek word meaning good death . In case those definitions didn t make it obvious enough, assisted suicide is usually done by doctors. I ve done quite extensive research on this subject over the past month and a half and I m going to give you several facts, and opinions (including my own) on the subject.
In order to understand the great amount of controversy behind the topic, one must first realize its history. Over the past few decades, America has witnessed a strange and keen shift in society’s view of life. In the 1960s the shift began as some states began legalizing abortion. In the 1970s, the Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade put the federal government’s stamp of approval on abortion nationwide. Today, the value of life is being obscured at the other end of the spectrum as the courts grant the elderly and sick the so-called “right to die.” The right to die theory states that when someone is ready to go, they should be allowed the right to do so.
The Essay on Assisted Suicide Pain Die Person
Assisted Suicide Assisted suicide is a hotly debated topic in Michigan today. Dr. Jack Kevorkian has made his life- taking, pain-relieving procedure possible to many elderly people and to others with terminal and painful summer of 1996 because I diseases who want to die with dignity. I was against assisted suicide before the had no life experiences with death. However, in August my grandmother ...
While abortion and assisted suicide are two different things, many people opposing euthanasia point to the legalization of abortion as the beginning of society s downfall as Nat Hentoff said in the book Euthanasia a part of the Opposing ViewPoints series. Other opposers like the late Dr. Leo Alexander who is also quoted by Hentoff said It is much like Germany in the late 20 s and 30 s. The barriers against killing are coming down. In my opinion, Dr. Alexander was taking it a bit far, no one is saying go out and kill everybody you don t like. Nobody is saying go out and kill all the senior citizens. Nor is anyone saying, Save America money! Kill the ones who cost us! That s not it at all. What pro-Euthanasia people mostly want is for the suffering of family, friends, and individual people or victims as the case may be to come to an end, as quickly and painlessly (for all parties) as possible
Upon researching Euthanasia, one can t help but come across the case of Baby Doe. The most common example used when talking about the moral wrongs involved with physician-assisted suicide. Baby Doe was born in an Indiana hospital on Good Friday, in 1982. Doe was born with a condition called Downs syndrome. If you are not familiar with Downs it is a condition which almost always leads to retardation. However, it may be very minor, at birth it is not possible to tell how severely it will effect one s mental capacity. A common ailment with Downs is the inability to get food into the stomach. Surgery is usually needed to correct this. Without the surgery, the child would starve. His parents refused to let the surgery be done. Doe s father had worked kids who had Downs syndrome. He saw how hard it was on the parents of these children, and it hardened his heart toward them. He did not want to have to go through life seeing his child live like that. Thus, he refused to let Doe live. Indiana courts ruled what the parents did was legally sanctioned. Of course, moralists however moaned immensely about what had happened to the baby. They believe this is totally against God s will. The problem with is this isn t assisted suicide. This is the parents misconduct that lead to the child s death, not the child itself. Under the unwritten rules of Euthanasia, this child would not legally have been allowed to be killed, because it did not say for it s self that it wanted to go, and was not old enough to make this judgement.
The Essay on People often complain about life in the U.S.
People complain when most of their needs are not met. The irony of it lies when complaints are just piled up without any further insights on how to solve such problems. In the long run, complaints become a part of the lifestyle of people who are good at pointing at the loopholes most especially of the government, and of the leaders. As there would always be a reason for every action that is done, ...
Euthanasia happens more often in foreign countries than it does here in the United States. In Netherlands NONVOLUNTARY Euthanasia makes up 15% of the deaths, according to one source, while another (euthanasia.com) claims it s 50% of the deaths. Supposingly, elderly people are afraid to check themselves into hospitals, for fear of being killed against their will. Of course, it s hard to believe when every source you look at gives you a different number. Regardless, Anti-Euthanasia people use this as support that it should be stopped. What they don t realize is that most people in favor of it do not at ALL advocate killing against the people s will. That s why it s called physician-assisted SUICIDE. Jay Johnson, whose opinions can be read at http://www.ohiolife.org/euth/liberty.htm, talks of two cases where what he calls Euthanasia was used beyond consent. He tells us of a Dutch doctor s patient, who was killed after recovering from cancer, because the bed space was needed. He has documentation of this, no proof, but I ll take his word for it, for sake of argument. He also talks of a friend of his, who is a doctor , who went to visit a patient in a nursing home, only to find out that the family of the lady had her killed because they needed her inheritance.
Again, no proof, no one interviewed to vouch for this, but I ll assume it is true. Jay picks out two instances, and bases most of his argument against them and hypothetical situations similar to those. He also says that do to these cases, Euthanasia is an economic issue. He says it wouldn t even happen, if it doesn t save us money. Is it fair to base ANYTHING on two instances out of hundreds? No, I don t believe it is. Every system has flaws. The world has yet to produce a completely perfect procedure in any course of life. The court system frequently slips up. Unwarranted arrests are often times being made. Unneeded taxes are sometimes being charged. Stuff like this happens, and it happens because life is not perfect. However, all the above systems are largely sufficient. Euthanasia is also a needed part of life. My grandmother was one of MANY people who wanted to die years before she finally passed away. She had lost one her sons, to a drug related car accident. Just about a year after this, she refused to take any more of her depressant pills. She had been on them for 25 years or more, and quit cold turkey. She had also lost another son, not literally, but emotionally. Her son, William, quit talking to her and her husband (his father).
The Essay on Euthanasia-Assisted Suicide
Webster's dictionary defines the term euthanasia as a painless, happy death. In recent years, a new term - assisted euthanasia has been introduced. This is when a terminally ill patient is assisted in committing suicide by their doctor or even by a friend or relative. There is a story which I read of an Aids patient. As he approached his time of death, he decided that rather than prolonging the ...
Many close to William question his sanity. Most think he s out of his mind. He has not said a word to any family members in 10 years, his kids excluded. This also had a great effect on her. (As a side note, William did not even show to her funeral.) She no longer felt the need to bathe. For the last 6 years of her life, she got into the bathtub only two times! Nobody could force her to get cleaned up, she wouldn t allow it. Before all this, she was one of the most social people on her block, and was a big family lady. However, for those 6 years, she d hide whenever company came over. She d see only my parents and I. Not any of her other grandchildren. She had diabetes, and arthritis, and was constantly in pain. Physically, and emotionally my grandmother was constantly hurting, and never ever happy. Can you imagine that? Can you imagine having to see someone like that? Unless you ve seen it, and lived through it, then probably not. The point of the story is my grandmother passionately WANTED to die. She was in bad shape in every form possible. She felt there was no longer a place on Earth for her. Maybe she was right, but that wasn t our decision to make. Doctors of course wouldn t do anything, because she wasn t fatally ill.
She asked them in a trip to the hospital in 1989, to pull the plug on her. They wouldn t, and so they let her suffer. They let my family suffer, but most of all, they made my grandfather suffer through six years of this. She would die 4 years later. Sure, we could have put her in a convalescent home, but I know better than to think that would have made her happier. It would have only made things worse. Moralists will tell you we did the right thing. Even my father will tell you we did the right thing. Perhaps deep down he believe that, but I know we did nothing but emotional harm to my parents, my since deceased grandfather, and even myself and my cousins. It wasn t long after her death that my grandfather started to show similar signs. He fought it, or at least hid it better, but it was obvious that he missed her so much, that he wanted to rejoin her. Since the whole ordeal, one of my cousins attempted suicide, and two have turned heavily to drugs. My grandfather went back to drinking, which as a diabetic, led to his death. Do those events have anything to do with each other? I can t prove it, but I think the situation with my grandmother contributed. I wonder about people who say physician-assisted suicide is morally wrong. I suppose they think letting people suffer both emotionally and physically is completely morally correct? Don t put them out of their misery; let them suffer for years and years. But don t limit their suffering to just the victim, extend it to family and friends so that they can feel the misery to. So that it may negatively effect every one around them as well. This is totally the correct thing morally, RIGHT? Yeah, sure. I find that to be a complete and total crock.
The Term Paper on Euthanasia Assisted Suicide 11
... the issue of euthanasia. On one side are the people who want to legalize physician-assisted suicide because they ... placed in the hands of people who will choose to kill select people based on their own private ... are fully met. Terminal and suffering patients can make a choice that is right for themselves. The ... in Dying, more than two million people in America die each year with 80 percent of those in ...
Other anti-Euthanasia activists like those at http://www.euthanasia.com, argue that Of those who attempt suicide but are stopped, less than 4 percent go on to kill themselves in the next five years; less than 11 percent will commit suicide over the next 35 years. They also argue that a request for assisted Suicide is typically a cry for help. It is in reality a call for counseling, assistance, and positive alternatives as solutions for very real problems. They also argue that most that want to die are clinically depressed, and just need counseling. They are right they JUST NEED counseling. Makes it sound so easy right? The only problem is, counseling only helps people who WANT to be helped. A large group of people who are clinically depressed because of illness or emotional distraught DO NOT WANT HELP. They have made up their minds, and will not let anyone or anything change them. This usually happens to people who have lived a full life, and feel they have nothing left to give. A counselor is not going to make them think otherwise.
Yet another website, http://www.cmf.org.uk/ethics/twelve.htm#1, argues that people with terminal illness are vulnerable, and unable to make decisions regarding themselves and their willingness to go on. He s basically saying; let us think for those people and don t let them think on their own. That denies us, the human race, the most important right we have, the right to be able to think on our own, the right to believe what we know is true.
The Essay on Assisted Suicide Kevorkian Physician Euthanasia
... (Anti-Euthanasia Task Force). With this of information in mind, should Dr. Jack Kevorkian be allowed to continue assisting people in committing suicide? The answer ... lethal substance by a physician to a suffering patient a form of euthanasia. Therefore, physician assisted suicide can now be defined as any action ...
You re probably asking yourself how I could I do any research on Euthanasia, and not mention Dr. Jack Kevorkian. Have no fear, as I will talk about him now. For those who are unfamiliar with him, Dr. Kevorkian is the most famous doctor who advocates, and used to regularly practice Euthanasia. Kevorkian has assisted in the suicides of at least 40 patients. Many of them were not terminally ill. However, those who were not, were paraplegic (had no use of arms or legs), had multiple sclerosis, were blind and had multiple sclerosis, cancer of some sort, or heart disease, emphysema, and arthritis. Others were invalids. I believe those who oppose need only to go to http://www.rights.org/deathnet/Kfiles_details.html on the web to find out why Euthanasia is very humane and very right morally. It is a list of Kevorkian s patients, their conditions, and their statements before dying. (I would have included this list with the paper, but it would have taken up 3 pages +).
Many of these patients could not speak or move their legs. Would you want to live if that s how you had to get by? I know I wouldn t. Others were blind, and had no use of either arms or legs. Some were in a great deal of pain and sick of going to the hospital every day to be treated. Some had their legs amputated, and could not move freely. Many could not physically kill themselves; they did not have enough muscle left. How is it morally right to watch one suffer like this? I don t understand how anyone could argue that Kevorkian s patient s time to go had come. He was doing them a favor, and was doing their family a favor. It s not about money, it s about being humane and ending the suffering of patients and patients families. A lady whose name I unfortunately do not recall came and talked to my government class this year. She was with MADD an organization against drunk driving. A statement she made is one every anti-Euthanasia activist should hear. Her daughter was in a fatal car accident, she went headfirst into a telephone poll, and died almost instantly. Had she lived, she would have been nothing more than a vegetable. This lady said, and I thank God for taking her, because I could not have lived seeing her like (an invalid) . Nobody wants to see a family member, a loved one left to be unable to think on his or her own. Many of these people have unrepairable brain damage, which makes them prone to their beds, and they constantly look spaced out, because they are unable to function or concentrate. They don t need to continue their suffering.
The Term Paper on Assisted Suicide Patient Life Suffering
... lets the patient pull the plunger, that is assisted suicide. If the doctor pushed the plunger, it would be euthanasia.' (McCuen 1994 ... argues against assisted suicide, then who are we to question it? Instead of trying to help end patients' lives, people and physicians ... Jack Kevorkian describes the difference between euthanasia and his own profession: "It's like giving someone a loaded gun. The patient ...
To me, the most upsetting of all the anti-Euthanasia supporters sentiments is that Euthanasia supporters advocate or even support suicide. THAT IS NOT THE CASE AT ALL! Two weeks ago a friend of mine started popping valiums and tried to kill herself. Why? Because things were a little rough in her life, she was struggling in her junior college, she was needing to work far too many hours to pay all her bills, and she was having no luck in her love life. Do I think any of that gives her a right to die? Absolutely not! She s normally a happy person and according to her, had only been feeling this depressed for about two weeks. All of that can be turned around. She had no illness that effects her well being she is not emotionally distraught to an incurable point. In other words, for her things will get better, unlike my grandmother. There is a huge difference there, and one that is apparently not visible to everyone.
I m not even going to get into the Christian argument against mercy killing, assisted suicide and Euthanasia. As an agnostic, religion is not an issue to me, and thus it s unfair for me to argue against me. All I will say is this, if it s against your religion to practice Euthanasia, then don t practice it. It s that simple. My views on abortion are no different.
Walter Helwig, a pro-Eutnasia activist is one who has hurt the fight more than anyone. He often makes statements that are nothing more than fodder for pro-life enthusiasts. He makes it sound as though all elderly people should be killed off, and everyone who costs hospitals much money to keep alive should also be forced to go. Unfortunately people don t understand that not everyone who advocates Euthanasia is like this man. Infact, most are NOTHING like him. It s important to comprehend that.
Let me follow all this up by saying I m not saying all paraplegics, handicapped people, AIDS or cancer patients, or those with any other illness or disability should be killed. That s not it at all. What I believe is that who can t deal with their health problems or disabilities, or even can t deal with their mental problems which plaque them and make them no longer want to live, should have the right to die. I m also not saying the minute someone is informed they have AIDS or any terminal illness should they be allowed to be killed. Give them time, let them think about it, let them see if they can live with it. If they feel as though they cannot deal with it, and counseling will not or has not helped then, I believe Euthanasia becomes necessary. Another thing I believe must be done before a physician assists in letting them die, is that a will must be written. I even think they should have re-write to their will if they have already written one. This would prove that they are in their right state of mind. I also believe the person should make a statement why they want to go. This alleviates the fear of family or friends thinking they are at fault.
Thus far, only one state, Oregon, has made assisted suicide legal. In I s first year of legality in Oregon, only 15 people were killed using this method. This number seems to be definite proof that the Euthanasia can be legalized and not overused, or abused. California has just recently introduced a bill, which if passed would also legalize a form of Euthanasia. Michigan, the state in which Jack Kevorkian practiced, shot down a near identical bill last November. Kevorkian, after having charges dropped in several previous court hearings against him, was found guilty of second-degree murder in March. Had the bill been passed in November, Kevorkian would have been indicted. Most believe the people preventing legalization are: conservative religious groups. They are often the same organizations which oppose access to abortion. medical associations whose members are dedicated to saving and extending life, and feel uncomfortable helping people end their lives, and groups concerned with disabilities, who fear that Euthanasia is the first step towards a society that will kill disabled people against their will. In 36 states it is felony murder to assist in the suicide of a patient. In other words, you do it, and you ll be spending much of your life behind bars, alongside Bubba the large, horny, converted to homosexual inmate. North Carolina, Utah, and Wyoming have no law prohibiting physician-assisted suicide.
If you ve read my this research paper and learned even one thing you did not know about Euthanasia, and are interested in finding out more, I encourage you to check out the book, and websites that I have mentioned. Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia will be debated for years and years to come. After seeing the deep-rooted arguments that both sides have put forth, I don t see either side cracking. I believe I ve made it quite clear where I stand on the issue. I unlike most of the majority of our society, am very pro Euthanasia, but then I am very pro-choice, so I guess this should come as no surprise. Euthanasia is fundamentally an issue of morals and ethics, and issues of morals and ethics are very seldomly ironed out, just ask those who ve done research on abortions, or capitol punishment. Assisted suicide was debated long before I started to research the topic, and will be debated long after I turn the final copy of this paper in. My only hope is that one day all people may realize how morally wrong and inhumane it is to do what they consider so morally right.
Works Cited
Opposing Viewpoints Series, Euthanasia, Greenhaven Press, 1990
http://www.euthanasia.com, Euthanasia.com, 1998
http://www.ohiolife.org/euth/liberty.htm, Euthanasia, A Case of Individual Liberty, November, 1995
http://www.cmf.org.uk/ethics/twelve.htm#1, Twelve Reasons Why Euthanasia Should Not Be Legalized, 1997
http://www.rights.org/deathnet/Kfiles_details.html, Kevorkian Files, 1998
