Euthanasia has become a definite issue in the United States. With personal morals and religious beliefs intertwining it is a controversial subject. Euthanasia is the act of taking another’s life that is either terminally ill or comatose with no means of living without the help of machines. Certain states have made this act legal; one of which is Oregon. An analysis of authors Derek Humphrey, Matthew Conolly, and Nancy Lederman while taking a look at the ramifications in Oregon will highlight the pros and cons of euthanasia.
“Offering Euthanasia Can Be An Act Of Love” author Derek Humphrey is pro euthanasia, which means he is for it. To Humphrey euthanasia isn’t an act of killing it is an act of compassion and mercy. Families always dread having a member of the family that is terminally ill and the only way for them to live is be hooked up to machines. While not being morally just to some having euthanasia puts an end to prolonging a life that will only be filled with suffering until the inevitable happens. According to Humphrey on page 156 of “Reading and Writing Short Arguments”, “ Helping another to die in carefully considered circumstances is part of good medicine and also demonstrates a caring society that offers euthanasia to hopelessly sick persons as an act of love.” Euthanasia can end comatose patients suffering when they have no means of waking up or way to survive solely on their own. Take the cases of Nancy Cruzan and Karen Quinlan for example. Both were in the same state where they had to depend on machines to live. The families went to court to have euthanasia to end their loved ones suffering. This was not murder but an act of love to end the pain. In a sense euthanasia can be considered the “ultimate civil liberty.”
Matthew Conolly, author of “Euthanasia Is Not The Answer,” is against euthanasia. Being Christian religious beliefs strongly affect his decision for opposing euthanasia. Being against euthanasia for...