Euthanasia can be defined as mercy killing or killing a person because of unbearable and incurable pain (Definition of Euthanasia, 1998; Dyer, 2008; Marker, n.d.). Furthermore, euthanasia can be committed directly or indirectly. Direct euthanasia refers to the act made by a person to finally ease and end his/her pain while indirect euthanasia is accomplished by a doctor who uses drugs, methods and operations that would kill the patient but would ease his/her pain. Indirect euthanasia can be also termed as if a doctor provides a patient with a drug or a prescription medicine in quantity that would induce death.
Acts can be further categorized as voluntary, non-voluntary and involuntary. Voluntary would mean that euthanasia has been performed because of the instruction and agreement of the patient who is able to foreseen the results of his/her actions (Voluntary Euthanasia, 1996). In the non-voluntary procedure, the patient cannot give his/her direct agreement with regards to a medical procedure that would end his/her sufferings (Pollard, n.d.). The unconscious state or the incapability to make decisions for the patients and his/her family can be clearly applied to the situation that would involve non-voluntary euthanasia. In layman’s term, this kind of euthanasia can be called “pulling the plug” (Ethics of Euthanasia, n.d.; Forms of Euthanasia, n.d.). The procedure that is both disapproved by the patient and his/her family meanwhile refers to involuntary euthanasia (Dyer, 2006). Involuntary euthanasia is done anyway even though the patient or the family of the patient refuses to undergo the method.
Religious, political, lobby and ethics groups have been debating and arguing about the legality and illegality of euthanasia. Arguments that involve ethics, religion and morality are used basically in the negative side or the issue of legalizing euthanasia. Due to all respect, euthanasia must not be used because this act is against the will of...