|
|
|
 
Euthanasia - Immoral or Human Right?
Recent debates over active euthanasia, "killing" a terminally ill
patient, in Holland, has risen the question whether euthanasia is immoral
or a simple human right. Doctors seem to have no doubt. They made an oath.
The definition of Euthanasia depends on whether it is active or
passive. Active Euthanasia i only allowed in Holland, and it means that the
doctor takes direct measures to put a patient to sleep, whereas passive
Euthanasia only involves stopping pill consumption, or stopping treatment.
In England, only passive Euthanasia is allowed.
Euthanasia touches some of the deepest feelings in human beings. It is
the power over life and death, and responsibilities no one wishes to take,
have to be taken. This, of cause, leads to the ultimatum, that it is the
patients own choice. But can we allow some one to take their own lives?
Doesn't this mean that everyone else around the patient have failed, that
more could have been done? From the patients point of view, a lot of
arguments talk in favor of euthanasia. For one, no body wants to be a
burden. If a person has had a car accident which paralyses him from neck
and down, and is doomed to sit in a wheelchair for the rest of his life, he
knows that he will be 100% dependant on the ones that care for him, his
lived ones, forever. It can also be mentioned that the life quality of a
terminally ill patient, gets reduced a lot. Never being able to walk again,
never being able to talk to your children again, never being able to go
shopping, swimming, playing, driving etc. must be terrible for anyone. The
whole situation only gets worse, if the patient himself, can see that his
condition is worsening, and only time keeps his thoughts clear. A third
very important point, is pain. If people see a deer, which had been hit by
a car, and is in terrible pain, they will kill it, out of pitty. Why
shouldn't the same be allowed with humans, if pain reaches a level, where
it is unbearable? For these people, who do not have the choice of active
euthanasia, self-starvation is the only choice.
The doctors view on euthanasia, seems to be overall different. First
of all, they have taken their wove, always to assist patients in prolonging
their lives, and Euthanasia completely contradicts this. Their approach is
"Where there is life, there is hope", so even a person, who has 20 tubes
stuck in them, feeding them, breathing for them, there is still life, and
who knows? Maybe the future will bring the cure?
Euthanasia does mean "Good death", but there can still be no
conclusion to a question, whether Euthanasia should be accepted or not.
Psychologists, philosophers, doctors and everybody else, will consider this
question for all time. My opinion is, that anyone who is terminally ill,
should have the choice, but to all rules there are exceptions, and to
something as serious as this, there shouldn't be.
ADDITIONAL FEATURED ESSAYS
Doctor Assisted Suicide
has always been a controversial topic. Ever since Dr. Jack Kevorkian was introduced to us in newspapers and on televisio
Euthanasia: Precious Life
My impression is that the idea of euthanasia, if not the practice, is gradually gaining acceptance within our society. P
Euthanasia: An Overview
There has been much debate in recent American society over the legality and morality of a patients right-to-die. Current
For Active Euthanasia
A person is in the hospital dying from an incurable disease. He is in excruciating pain. His body is withering away and
A Definitive Argument On Euthanasia
Euthanasia is a very controversial topic, one that provokes both anger and sympathy. There are considered to be two kind
|
|
|
|
