First, Should euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide be legal? I support euthanasia because we are all sentient beings in control of our own destinies and governance over our bodies. Jasper Emmering, MD stated, “…Then there is a practical matter: the moral distinction between abstaining from life-saving treatment, palliative sedation and euthanasia is very murk, for me it doesn’t exist at all. Therefore it makes no sense that the first two are legal while the third is not.” To get a better understanding of the debate, allow me to explain what physician-assisted suicide is; the situation occurs when a physician facilitates a patient’s death by providing the necessary means and/or information to enable the patient to perform the life-ending act. A physician may provide sleeping pills and information about the lethal dose, with the full knowledge of the patient’s expectation for the outcome.
The first amendment says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech…” (Bill of Rights). Freedom of speech is a good example of the limitations we have as US citizens because we are not permitted to use that amendment if it affects public safety. For example, we are not allowed to say that we have a bomb in an airplane when it is not true. As long as it does not provoke any other consequences in other people we can use the first amendment. The second amendment works the same way; we have the right to have a gun as long as it does not interfere with public safety,
Issues in Law and Justice 30 Jan. 2013 Legal Issues of Pro Euthanasia Pro euthanasia is a subject that has been debated worldwide for a very long time with very little success. This practice has been argued as far back as Ancient Greece and Rome; where Socrates employed hemlock as a means of hastening death but was criticizes by Hippocrates and others at that time. Prominent Americans have argued for permitting suicide in cases of chronic illness since 1913 concerning issues of political and social ethics. I think that the quality of life and one’s dignity is the main issue here and should not be interfered with by government. If a person is suffering in unbearable pain and cannot enjoy life then euthanasia would be the best option to help that person die a dignified and peaceful death, rather than a period of lost dignity and prolonged suffering.
Taking in the situation and seeing that “Sycamore Pharmaceuticals to come under fire for promoting its popular rheumatoid arthritis drug, Osteoporin, for the treatment of other diseases like Crohn’s disease and lupus”. (Daft, R.L.) John Blake, a worker of Sycamore Pharmaceuticals, is faced with telling the truth to the Food and Drug Administration or to continue to lie for the company. There are many things I would suggest to John Blake and the first thing would to be honest with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) because keeping your morals straight will also look better. It is possible for John to be penalized or he could lose his employment with the company.
As such, it is a murder. When you kill an unborn child, you rob it of its whole future life. Therefore it is never morally permissible and it should be illegal.” This statement is inappropriate, and in order to challenge it in the best manner, we must look at it from a different prospective. To understand the development of the fetus it is important to discuss several key points for and against abortions, to help formulate a working argument which can be generally accepted. Abortions are mainly a moral matter; however they may also be a legal matter, and as long as something is legal, no matter how immoral, it can be done without any consequence.
However, there are many pros and cons to each side of the argument. Physician-assisted suicide is unethical based on the Hippocratic Oath, but is ethical based on the patient’s views – which sometimes outweigh the morals of a physician. Physician-assisted suicide first became an issue when our society decided that it was neither moral nor ethical for a physician to help end a terminally ill patient’s life. According to Katie Pickert, Dr. Jack Kevorkian brought lots of attention to the topic during the “epic assisted suicide battle of the 1990s” (1). People who argue with Kevorkian for physician-assisted suicide feel that by helping a patient end his or her life peacefully is helpful to family and friends.
No civilized society permits one human to intentionally harm or take the life of another human without punishment, and abortion is no different. We see murder as an awful, hideous crime, but yet we stick up and protect abortion like its absolutely okay. When you chose to no longer carry that child, you are choosing to not only strip that child of a chance at life but also you are taking away God`s gift to that child, and how is that right, because you most certainly got to live? It is absolutely inhumane and wrong, because abortion can be considered murder, since the fetus has already began its journey toward birth and a life. Secondly, abortion can lead to severe medical and psychological issues down the road.
Even in the case of rape, the RC Church does not support abortion - the foetus would be paying for someone else’s crime. “Human life is sacred”. Humanae Vitae, 1968: “The unborn human being’s right to live is one of the inalienable human rights” Pope John Paul II, 1985 "Abortion is a serious sin. Everyone, whether Catholic or not, should have a proper respect for human life. "Declaration on Procured Abortion, 1974: "From the time that the ovum is fertilised a new life is begun which is neither that of the father or the mother.
The author is very explicit about his or her stand on Euthanasia as the thesis statement of the author has been mentioned in the first paragraph and the last paragraph. It is stated in the text that the practice of mercy killing due to their illness or a disability is an unnatural thing to do and should not be practiced as no one has the authority or the right to decide who to kill. The author also highlights its use in Germany during the World War two in which the government would decide who would be killed due to their inabilities. The Nazis have their own idea of what a perfect human race is and this is one of their methods for their goal. The problem that was discussed was its hypothetical conclusion that history might repeat itself.
To this day, one of the biggest controversial topics that continue to spark endless discussions is the public approval of euthanasia. Euthanasia which is commonly known as “assisted suicide” is the deliberate action of ending a life to relieve continuous pain and suffering (Nordqvist, 2010). This has become a complicated global issue, as various cultures battle with the list of ethical, religious, and legal factors that play a major part in the act. Many see euthanasia as a benefit not only for the patient, but for the patient’s family as well. In this case, the practice is able to end one’s life in a peaceful manner, while a financial and emotional burden can also be lifted off of the family members.