Introduction:
Why the discussion on this issue does holds any importance.
The literal meaning of the word euthanasia and how is it defined.
How and why did the issue gain importance
Body
Categories on euthanasia, namely voluntary euthanasia, involuntary euthanasia and un-voluntary euthanasia and to what extent are accepted in the society and what are the factors that discriminate one category from the other.
A brief description of Active and passive euthanasia and to what extent are they accepted in the society.
Is euthanasia right of a single individual to whom it may concern or should others and the government be allowed to interfere with it.
States where euthanasia is legalized, states where it is not legalized and states where it is accepted as a criminal act and the conditions given by the state court under which they are legalized.
States in which both active and passive euthanasia is accepted, states where only one euthanasia is accepted (passive euthanasia) and the states where neither type of euthanasia is accepted.
Both pro’s and con’s of the related topic and a brief description of why it is accepted as morally correct by few and unacceptable by the others
What opinions do different religions hold regarding this subject?
Is bearing the excruciating pain justified by the masses and the political leaders.
Conclusion
Supporting facts in favor of legalizing euthanasia with reference to the case study
Supporting facts against legalizing euthanasia with reference to the case study
Can euthanasia actually be considered as a violation of human rights?
Who is to judge which aspect of euthanasia overpowers the other?
Amongst the various topics of the present day debate, euthanasia receives special attention, on which people around the globe have controversial opinions. Many question whether it is, or should be, morally acceptable and whether or not it should be legalized. This topic deserves to be discussed and expressed more than any other social issue as this is one of the most influencing issues, not being limited to a single individual rather the entire society. This topic received special attention after the case of Dr. Jack Kevorkian, a physician, who lured about 130 people to death forcing everyone to ponder on this issue and to regard it as a major concern of our current time. Various opinions arise around the globe regarding this very subject, some arguing that euthanasia indeed is a mercy killing and the others arguing that it’s in fact assisted suicide, each faction strongly believing that their point of view is correct.The word Euthanasia is instigated from a Greek origin root meaning good death and is defined as ‘ 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’ according to the dictionary Merriam-Webster. Some argue that this is against the entire principle of humanity while the other emphasize that it demonstrates nothing but humanity. People who usually favor euthanasia mostly fail to distinguish between the two types of euthanasia namely, active and passive euthanasia. They also believe that euthanasia is their democratic right, and thus the state should not have the right to believe otherwise.
Whereas in involuntary euthanasia, euthanasia on a person is performed without his/her consent meaning either the patient was not asked regarding the matter or does not desire to die. Involuntary euthanasia is considered as a straightforward violation of human rights and is also considered similar to murder. This type of euthanasia is carried out usually by opponents who believe that the person has no or very fewer chances of surviving and if not euthanized, will suffer a great deal of pain, for example, a soldier who’s abdomen is split open due to a bomb blast and is in immense pain and suffering. In this situation, the doctor decides to end his suffering through euthanasia. Although the consent of the sufferer is not present, this euthanasia is considered noble in this case as the only intention of the doctor was pure and noble aiming to end the unbearable suffering of the sufferer. Therefore, this category of euthanasia represents a situation from one extreme to the other wherein the first case the patient is murdered for one’s own selfish reasons and, on the other hand, it is an act of total selflessness.
Another criterion of division splits Euthanasia into two different types namely active and passive euthanasia. Active euthanasia is usually considered homicide, in which medical professionals or any other person acts intentionally leading the patient or victim to die whereas passive euthanasia is regarded as non-criminal in which patient dies because the medical professionals stop doing what was keeping the patient alive previously. This can be done by various ways including switching off life support machines, not performing a life-saving operation, refusing to provide life-saving drugs to the patient or stop feeding the patient through feeding tubes. People argue widely on the active and passive euthanasia some saying that in real there is no or very little difference between the two, as both lead to the same outcome, irreversible death and argue that how can killing and letting die be any different while the others have completely different argument, and state that active euphemism is indeed better than that of passive euphemism. The argument they provide is that in active euthanasia people suffer instant and painless death and thus putting the patient through minimal mental and physical torture whereas in passive euphemism, the doctors denying the treatment of the patient or stopping the feeding process cause the patient to suffer immense pain.
The next question arising is whether or not should it be legalized or accepted amongst the mass. According to New York Times ‘Five states in this country have laws allowing doctors to prescribe life-ending drugs to mentally competent, terminally ill adults’ .Also According to the online website, Euthanasia.com, 35 states have legislated opposing euthanizing, and 9 states consider this as a criminal act. In present days, euthanasia is legalized in various countries but in few only passive euthanasia is permitted such as India, Ireland, Mexico while in others both, active and passive euthanasia, is permitted such as Belgium, Luxemburg, and Netherlands. In 2010, the Columbian court permitted euthanasia, allowing the patients who are terminally ill to carry forward euthanasia. Few of the terminally ill diseases were listed by the court as AIDS, liver failure, kidney failure and cancer. The law also stated that this was not authorized for degenerative diseases such as Lou Gehrig’s disease, Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease.
The state when legalizing this controversial subject gives various reasons. The widely presented reason is that the patient in disease has no surety of ever recovering the excruciating pain and, therefore, keeping him/her alive would be a waste of resources resulting in disruption of economy, the same resources could be spent for more deserving people with more chances of recovery they also explain their decision by saying that denying this right would mean violation of human rights as no human deserves to suffer pain. According to the writer, Morris M in the article 10 Arguments For Legalizing Euthanasia refers to a Dutch report that states that in the life span of a patient due to euphemism in 86 percent cases usually decrease by few hours and utmost a week. .
Therefore, people arguing that a precious human life is lost should also consider that the life was bound to be lost under all circumstances and but the suffering of the patient is reduced. In addition according to BBC life and death is one’s own private matter and no other person or a state have a right to interfere in the matter. Therefore, no court or no individual has a right to deny the freedom of dying to any human or animal, of course as long as it harms no other human . The emotional impact on the person being forced to live cannot be ignored under any argument in which the patient usually suffers extreme cases of depression resulting in the mental capabilities being condensed therefore many lay great emphasis on the fact that a person should be allowed to die with dignity. Many belief that if people are denied the right to die, it will lead to yet many suicides forcing people to take their own lives. The disease not only has a great impact on the life of the patient but also the relatives and friends who also suffer emotionally and mentally due to the condition of the patient. The patient may also suffer financially and may not be able to afford the treatment of the disease and also the limited resources of the state can be relocated to a person who has greater chances at healthier lives.
Euthanasia has its cons including the fact that innocent people can be pressurized into dying and also using it for one’s own selfish reasons such as the close family members and friends who cannot bear or deny to bear the burden of the patient mentally pressurize them to choose euthanasia. Many objections on this subject also arise on the basis of religious grounds where the religious scholars believe that the right of deciding to whether a person lives or dies belongs only to God and no one else. . The same viewpoint is also exhibited by Josef Kure who states ‘people euthanasia is tantamount to or merely a euphemism for killing, the violation of human life and an infringement of the human right to live, being contradictory to the sanctity of life doctrine and facilitating the abuse of vulnerable persons’
As J Donald Boudreau, MD says ‘My personal belief is that healing and euthanizing are simply not miscible.’ . Thus, healing and euthanizing are in no way similar, and people arguing that it’s a way of healing and matter of choice cannot be justified according to him. In the advancing technologies today, various equipment have been introduced to relieve the patient of all the pain and suffering and, therefore, considering morally and ethically challenged thing such as euthanasia should not be even taken into consideration and is unnecessary. It is also argued that a person in pain or suffering is not in his right mind to make decisions as severe as this which is the matter of life and death and the decisions made cannot be taken back.
Illness does not only inflict pain on an individual but in addition, to pain also causes cases of severe depression which clouds the mind of the patient thus in this state the decision of an individual is not carried out by reasoning but in fact results from mental illness rather than the disease. Legalizing this would also reduce the trust in physicians as they would have both the right to decide for a person to live and right to die and this certainly could lead to miss-trust in the hearts of the patients for the physicians. So what would be the life without physicians? Would this not erode the medical profession? The biggest fear that arises in the heart of people is the misuse of euthanasia. If euthanasia is to be legalized, what disastrous effects could it have on the society? People give clear reference to misuse of euthanasia by the Nazis who actually used it to eradicate the Jews during the second world war, therefore, legalizing it would increase the insecurities of different races as this could also be used to eradicate them.
A case study of Dax Cowart throws further light on this subject. Dax Cowart was badly burnt in a car explosion and even after seconds of the explosion, he was in unbearable pain in which he requested his friends, family members, and the doctors repeatedly to free him from his misery but he was denied this plea. Although Dax Cowart lives a normal and healthy life now, only his sight being affected, he strongly believes that he was wronged to being denied the right to die in that torment. But the fact that the patient afterward lived a happy and healthy life cannot be ignored, and if this patient had been euthanized on his request, his precious life would have been lost for no significant reason. On the other hand case study of Dianne Pretty clearly illustrates that euthanasia should be legalized who suffered from motor neuron disease and suffered a very painful death which she wanted to avoid. She appealed to the UK courts and the European court of human rights to granted the right to die, which she was denied and, therefore, being denied the right to die with the dignity she embraced her death which was full.
After studying the real life situations based on the topic, one cannot argue in favor or in opposition to this subject as in one case it denying the right of euthanizing gave a new, healthy life to a person whereas on the other hand it denied the person choosing to die with dignity the right only resulting in more suffering and pain. As discussed previously, euthanasia can be termed as both suicide and murder, and a very fine line exists between the two. A person with the ill judgment due to the suffering of the disease may make a wrong decision by choosing euthanasia without even considering the alternative means of medication. Also, a patient may also be forced to embrace death either because he/she was not asked of his/her choice in the matter or was pressurized by the society making the patient belief there is not the alternative way. The questions that arise now are who is to judge the right from wrong? Who is to decide that which aspect of euthanasia empowers the other?
Works Cited
BBC Ethics. Pro-euthanasia arguments. n.d. 17 March 2016 <http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/euthanasia/infavour/infavour_1.shtml>.
Boudreau, J Donald. "Physician-Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia: Can You Even Imagine." The Permanente Journal (2011): 79-84.
Carey, Benedict. "Assisted Suicide Study Questions Its Use for Mentally Ill." the New York times 10 February 2016.
Kuře, Josef. EUTHANASIA-THE “GOOD DEATH” CONTROVERSY IN HUMANS AND ANIMALS. Croatia: InTech, 2011.
Merriam, George and Charles. euthanasia. n.d. 3 March 2016 <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Euthanasia>.
Morris, M. 10 Arguments For Legalizing Euthanasia. 12 September 2013. <http://listverse.com/2013/09/12/10-arguments-for-legalising-euthanasia/>.
rs revision. Euthanasia – Case Studies. n.d. 17 March 2016 <http://www.rsrevision.com/Alevel/ethics/euthanasia/Euthanasia_Case_Studies.pdf>.
Writemypapers.com. Euthanasia: a Right to Die or a Right to Kill? n.d. 17 March 2016 <http://www.writemypapers.org/examples-and-samples/essay-on-euthanasia.html>.
