Euthanasia_and_Assisted_Suicide

Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide Euthanasia and assisted suicide is a widely debated topic: the right to live, or the right to die' Euthanasiais defined as the intentional killing of a dependent human being for his or her alleged benefit. There are many different kinds of euthanasia, but the most debated are voluntary and non-voluntary euthanasia. In voluntary, the patient gives their consent to die, where in non-voluntary the patient gives no consent or request to be killed. All kinds of euthanasia are illegal except for in the state of Oregon, the Netherlands, and Belgium. In those places, doctors cannot be guilty of euthanasia. Where pro-euthanasia activists say euthanasia is a human right, those against euthanasia say it is not. In the Washington v. Glucksberg case of 1997, the Supreme Court stated that the “’right’ to assistance in committing suicide is not a fundamental liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause.” That means that people are not entitled to be assisted in committing suicide. Laws to prevent euthanasia and assisted suicide are not there to “mandate suffering.” They are in place to protect the people from dishonest, unprincipled doctors. Some believe in a “slippery slope” theory, or a snowball effect. They are simply theorizing that if we open the door of legalizing euthanasia, we are giving the people an inch and they will take a mile. Those who support euthanasia often look to the Netherlands for a legally and ethically balanced example, yet it was reported that 1,040 people die each year by involuntary euthanasia. As said by an Addie Clark Harding Professor, just because a patient requests being killed, that doesn’t justify a reason to kill them. The abolition of one’s desire to continue living does not also abolish their living body the right to be respected. When no restrictions are in place, the medical community is known to commit atrocities. In the ‘80s, babies were killed because of mental disabilities. After new legislations were in place, government funding was given to hospitals for lifesaving treatment of disabled newborns. Like every other part of society, the medical community must also be under regulations. As a whole, people have mostly always valued life. Wesley Smith, a consultant of the International Anti-Euthanasia Task Force, argued that by accepting nihilistic views, we are accepting a lawless “death culture.” We would be accepting the principle that death is the best way to deal with life’s most difficult challenges. Wesley believes that going from a society where everyone has “equal inherent moral worth” to one of completely opposite values would bring about disturbing results. In an article on issues with legalizing Assistance of Suicide, studiesshowed that 93% of people who committed suicide were mentally ill at the time. Another study showed that out of 886 suicidal people who were helped, five years later under 4% of those people went on to kill themselves. In a nutshell, suicidal people should be helped with their problems, not helped to die. Clinical suicidologists agree that rational suicide, terminal illness, and uncontrollable pain are all illegitimate reasons to help someone die. The rational thinkers, are not really rational, but are made of reasons that are unknown. Most terminally ill were clinically depressed and could have been treated, and in this age, there is no such thing as an uncontrollable pain. Uncontrollable pain would be a result of an inadequate doctor. Some doctors excuse euthanasia with their patients being in a “persistent vegetative state” (PVS). This is different from a coma, because when a person is in a vegetative state that is awake but not aware. When a person is said to be PVS, it is essentially a medical assumption based on lack of evidence. I do not support euthanasia. For me, the right to live or die is on an ethical, personal level. I believe that in the last days of your life, there is ‘closure’ information that you learn. I believe relationships can be mended, last words could be said, and that the person may pass in peace. I strongly believe that it is a person’s choice to live or die, but I do not believe that a doctor may intentionally interfere with their wishes. Whether that means injecting them with lethal medicine or overdosing them with a deadly drug, it is killing them. For example, if a cancer patient knows they will die in a few months, and requests that their doctor administers a lethal injection,I believe that the doctor has the right to stop the pain, ease emotional distress, and keep them comfortable. In other words, they have a right to put the patient in hospice. By no means should the doctor be liable to facilitate their means of death. If a person has quality of life left, whether or not they requested death, nothing but nature should change the course of their existence. My decision to not support Euthanasia will affect myself, my family, and my community in different ways. It will affect my family and I because we have chosen together to not support it. We’ve let each others’ living wills be known so that atrocities are not committed against us and so that we can look after each other in our times of need. Because euthanasia is such a personal matter, for it to affect my community laws would either have to change, or euthanasia would have to occur more often. I am hoping that it doesn’t widely affect my community and remains illegal.