Should Euthanasia or Physician-Assisted Suicide Be Legal? Dion O. Hales SOC120 Introduction to Ethics and Social Responsibility Prof. Theodore Framan June 22, 2012 Should Euthanasia or Physician-Assisted Suicide Be Legal? While killing yourself is harder than having someone do it for you is that killing yourself requires firmer resolve, Should euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide be legal? Because a patient's last will and last testament should be honored, a competent patient's request to terminate life-sustaining treatment, and it is our moral right to prevent a person from suffering if they suffer from a disease we cannot cure. First, Should euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide be legal?
The case could then be turned into that of homicide. The Arguments I believe that everyone should have the right to their own death whenever they feel they need or deserve it. If a certain individual feels that they would be miserable for the rest of their life after being paralyzed below the waist, and they request to be euthanized, who are we to deny them? So far, only two states have legalized physician-assisted suicide: Oregon and Washington. Their rules to receive this death is that the patient must provide two verbal requests and one written request to their health care provider.
This issue is looked through many perspectives and arguments. Assisted Suicide 3 A case for assisted suicide is a powerful one, people that oppose any measures Permitting assisted suicide argue that society has a moral duty to protect and to preserve All life, to allow anyone to assist others in destroying their lives violates a fundamental Duty we have to respect human life. One case of assisted suicide that I will talk more about later was
Situation Ethics state that as long as a person's actions are intended to be loving, it is right (Ray Elliott 2001). The only thing that is “wrong” is something that is intentionally unloving (Ray Elliott 2001). Euthanasia is based in Situation Ethics as people turn to Euthanasia to end suffering and allow a person in pain to be at peace. However, euthanasia is often essentially manslaughter (David Lanham 1993), therefore creating an ethical issue as to whether euthanasia should be allowed to occur. Euthanasia is also a difficult issue as there is more than one type of euthanasia.
An epidemic is sweeping America. An epidemic which puts the government in the position of supporting and advocating suicide. A disease which will infect the morals and values in the medical world, until they no longer have any effect. A mindset which will lead America on paths to immoral places where she never intended to go. Euthanasia is sweeping America.
Physician-assisted suicide, a suicide made possible by a physician providing a patient with the means to kill themselves, and euthanasia, the mercy killing of one individual by another, are highly controversial topics. Even countries which share a great deal of their philosophical and moral foundations, such as the United States and much of Western Europe, come to very different conclusions and create very different legislation in this area. However, I believe that there are some basic conclusions that argue both for and against PAS and euthanasia, and when they are weighed against each other there is a much stronger case for legalizing the practices than for banning them. To begin, though, it is important to point out that banning a practice
By examining the views on abortion of Marry Anne Warren, this paper will argue that abortion is morally permissible on the grounds that early fetuses, though they are genetically human, are not persons (members of the moral community). In this paper I will introduce Warren’s argument on why abortion is morally permissible followed by a counter argument by Don Marquis. Furthermore, this paper will analyze why Warren’s argument is more persuasive than the counter argument offered by Marquis followed by criticisms of the analysis. Lastly, I will discuss why the objections to the analysis are unconvincing. Warren beings her argument by acknowledging that abortion “…usually entails the death of a fetus.
Euthanasia should remain illegal Euthanasia is a word with such great meaning but is often misunderstood by individuals. Some define this term as “the right to die” whereas others define it as “the right to kill Euthanasia is the act of encouraging a painless death or looking for the help for a good death. The act of euthanasia often occurs because long-term patients would rather drink poison or get shot by somebody than suffering their whole life fighting against a major disease. The term euthanasia is also known as mercy killing since it’s a way of ending one’s life who is not willing to live anymore. [1] This happens usually for compassionate reasons such as to reduce the pain of the ill ones.
The article entitled “Should Euthanasia be practiced” addresses the position of the writer disagreeing on the use of the highly controversial practice of Euthanasia. This is also called mercy killing which refers to the practice of intentionally ending ones’ life in order to end the suffering of a patient. This is usually done when the patient is suffering from an illness usually terminal. Furthermore, the author also cited the heavy use of this similar violent process back in Germany during World War two in order to support his argument. 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.
One ethical issue that Kant can be applied to is euthanasia. This means “good death” and in general is the act of asking someone to help you to die. The case study I will discuss is voluntary euthanasia is where you actively take something to kill you. This is widely debated as it is illegal in most countries. Kant uses the categorical imperatives to determine whether or not this is right, to choose to die.