26th November 2013
Disposing of one’s pain is what all physicians desire to achieve and the purpose of the job is to save individual lives. Typical everyday people turn to trusted doctors to ease their anguish and support their health because of their vast quantity of medical knowledge. Having this knowledge allows "doctors [to] have the enormous privilege of touching and changing lives” (“Good Doctor”). The strange contradiction to this very objective is the act of Euthanasia. The word itself is unearthed from a Greek term that defines to “good death” (“Nightingale Alliance”). Euthanasia is basically ending someone’s life with medication or deadly injections. Euthanasia’s debate has been for or against whether or not the concept is even morally right. While proponents argue that everyone has a right to die, that practicing Euthanasia will lower taxes across the nation, and that the law protects people from involuntarily undergoing the death process, critics of Euthanasia hold a different view. They argue that by legalizing Euthanasia, the process will be abused, leading to many people going through the process involuntarily, which will then cause a decline in scientific advancement of medicines.
Proponents of Euthanasia maintain that everyone has the right to die. For example, “if a hopelessly ill patient is in great pain, with absolutely no chance of recovering, asks for a lethal dose, so as not to wake again, should the doctor be allowed to give the lethal dose?” (“Public Opinions Polls”). Therefore, suffering patients should be granted their wishes if they cannot be helped. An excellent reason why Euthanasia should be an option for a suffering patient is so it stops them from having a terrible quality of life. Quality is always better than quantity! The type of value in life is up to the person, not the government or any physician (Baack). As an example, Sue Rodriguez demonstrates this view. She...