|
|
|
 
Euthanasia: The Right to Die
Thesis: Euthanasia should be legalized so, if we ever have a
loved one that is suffering and death is certain,
that we have the choice to ease their pain if they
want.
I. Introduction
A. Examples showing why euthanasia is
receiving national attention.
B. A summary of reasons offered by those opposed
to euthanasia is given.
C. A summary of reasons offered by those in favor
of euthanasia is given.
D. Transition into my argument.
II. Body
A. A person has the right to die with dignity.
B. Everything should not be done to prolong life
if the patient does not want it.
C. Doctors are not always responsible to do
everything they can to save somebody.
D. Refute the argument that euthanasia is
unethical.
III. Conclusion
A. Thoughts on freedom people have.
B. A quote to end with.
"A dying man needs to die, as a sleepy man needs to sleep, and there comes
a time when it is wrong, as well as useless to resist."
-Steward Alsop, Stay of Execution
Euthanasia has become an issue of increasing attention because of Dr.
Jack Kevorkian's assisted suicides. As of October 21 Kevorkian has
assisted in nineteen suicides. Because of the increasing number of suicides
in Michigan, Gov. Engler signed an anti-suicide law in late February that
made doctor-assisted suicides a felony. During the 21-month trial period
of the new law anyone assisting in a suicide can be sentenced to up to four
years in prison and fined more than $2,000 (Reuters, 1993).
With the passing of this law I thought that most people would be
against the right-to-die, not so. In a poll cited in a 1991 issue of USA
Today eighty percent of Americans think sometimes there are circumstances
when a patient should be allowed to die, compared to only fifteen percent
think doctors and nurses should always do everything possible to save a
person's life. It also showed that eight in ten adults approve of state
laws that allow medical care for the terminally ill to be removed or
withheld, if that is what the patient "wishes", whereas only thirteen
percent disapproved of the laws. Also seventy percent think the family
should be allowed to make the decision about treatment on behalf of the
patient, while another five percent think this is suitable only in some
cases (Colasnto, 1991, p. 62).
The results on mercy killing surprised me even more. Seventy percent
think it is justified at least sometimes for a person to kill his or her
spouse, if he or she is suffering terrible pain caused by a terminal
illness. Even suicide is starting to be accepted. About half the public
think a "moral right" to suicide exists if a person has an incurable
disease or is suffering great pain with no hope of recovering(Colasnto,
1991, p. 63).
About half of those with living parents think their mothers and
fathers would want medical treatment stopped if they were suffering a great
deal of pain in a terminal disease or if they became totally dependant on a
family member, and forty percent of their parents would want medical
treatment stopped if daily activities became a burden(Colasnto,1991, p. 63).
With the continuous coverage of Dr. Kevorkian the views of people will
continue to change. Euthanasia will continue to become more of an issue.
As with any issue, each viewpoint is supported by many reasons. Those
who oppose euthanasia argue that the medical profession must always be on
the side of "preserving life" (Schofield, 1988, p. 24). Another reason is
euthanasia will lead to the "devaluation of life" (Low, 1989, p. 37). Also
they think it will force doctors and family members to "judge the value of
a patient's life". Critics also say that acceptance will spread from the
terminally ill to the less serious ill, the handicapped, or the mentally
retarded. (Russ, 1989, p. 117)
One reason that just about everyone who favors euthanasia agrees with
is that a person has the right to a death with dignity. Another reason is
a person should be allowed a "natural death" instead of a prolonged death
with medical equipment(Battin, 1985, p. 19). Still another reason is that
doctors are supposed to ease the pain of people not prolong it (Battin,
1989, p. 19).
Death is one of the few things that all people have in common. This
means that there is a chance for anyone to face the decision of letting
someone go. Euthanasia should be legalized so people will only have to
think about the difficult decision of the present and not about the
consequences of the future.
One of the base reasons people for euthanasia give is, a person has
the right to die with dignity. People should be allowed to control their
own deaths. Why should a patient be forced to live if they think their
present standard of life has "degenerated to the point of meaningless",
when doctors can no longer help, and perhaps the pain has become
unbearable? At this point, if the person is of sound mind, they should
have the choice to continue on or to peacefully die, even if they need
assistance in doing so(Larue, 1988, p. 153).
If the person is not able to make this decision there should be a few
options, a living will, the family's choice, and the doctor's choice. A
living will should be allowed to control the outcome if the person is
unable to. If there is no living will the family, consulting with a
qualified physician, should be allowed to decide for the patient. The one
situation that is most controversial is a patient with no family or no
family member qualified to make the decision. Some think the doctor should
be able to make the decision for the patient.
I believe that the doctor should be allowed to decide if the patient
has reached the point of only getting worse and in considerable pain. In
any of these situations a doctor should be at least an advisor, they are
the ones with the medical knowledge, and know the present condition of the
patient and the alternatives. "In any humane or humanistic view of what is
good, it is morally wrong to compel hopelessly suffering or irreversible
debilitated patients to stay alive when death is freely elected" (Larue,
1988, p. 151).
In some cases, like terminal illness, "death is often better than
dyeing", mainly due to the way that the person will die. They may have to
go thorough a long period of pain and suffering. Ask yourself which you
would choose, early or prolonged death (Larue, 1988, p. 153). Even if you
do not think that you would end your life or another's life should personal
views decide that it is not the right thing for another to do. Does any
person have the right to control the choices of others?
Another argument is that not all the should everything be done to
preserve a life. The natural balance of life and death has been disturbed
by the advances of technology. No longer does a person die when they are
supposed to; life-support now prevents that. Opponents say doctors should
not play God by killing patients ,but do they realize that by prolonging
death the medical profession is doing exactly that? Christian Barnard, at
the World Euthanasia Conference, was quoted as saying, "I believe often
that death is good medical treatment because it can achieve what all the
medical advances and technology cannot achieve today. and that is stop the
suffering of the patient" (Battin, 1987, p. 21).
A differant version of the same argument is, doctors are not always
responsible to do everything they can to save somebody. If a doctor's duty
is to ease the pain of his patients, then why should this exclude the
possibility of letting them die? If a patient has a terminal illness and
is in great pain and the patient thinks they would rather die now than
continue living the with the pain, the doctor should be allowed to help.
What about a person who is in a vegetative state for a prolonged period of
time with no hope of recovery, should the doctor do everything? Howard
Caplan gives an example of this. I have on my census a man in his early 40s,
left an aphasic triplegic by a motorcycle accident when he was 19. For
nearly a quarter of a century, while most of us were working, raising
children, reading, and otherwise going about our lives, he's been
vegetating. His biographical life ended with the crash. He can only
articulate - only make sounds to convey that he's hungry or wet. If he were
to become acutely ill, I would prefer not to try saving him. I'd want to
let pneumonia end it for him" (1987, p. 92). I believe that a doctor should
do what he can up to a point. If a person is at the point where death is a
blessing a doctor should not be forced to save a person if they go into
cardiac arrest. Also it might be the patients decision for nothing to be
done, in this case the doctor should do as instructed.
Is euthanasia unethical? That is what the opposition argues. They
preach that doctors too often play God on the operating tables and in the
recovery rooms and doctors must always be on the side of life (Battin, 1987,
p. 24). They say, "Life is to be preserved and suffering was to be
alleviated", but in fact the American Medical Association said, "Physicians
dedicate their lives to the alleviation of suffering, to the enhancement
and prolongation of life, and the destinies of humanity". They clearly
state the "alleviation of suffering" before "the enhancement and
prolongation of life". So if the reduction of pain would mean letting the
person pass on, why would that be wrong and unethical? They also claim
euthanasia is a "breach of the laws of humanity", what about the laws of
nature? These laws were established long before mankind. Humanity
breached the laws of nature, long before the "laws of humanity" were broken,
with advances like respirators. People are the ones upsetting the balance
of nature when they try to keep persons alive who are supposed to die. The
planet has survived for a long time without the laws of humanity, so what
makes them right? (Schofield, 1988, p. 26)
Opponents also claim that euthanasia is against God, therefore it is
unethical. Yet passive euthanasia, or refraining from doing anything to
keep the patient alive, has been in practice since four centuries before
Christ; and in the centuries that followed neither the Christians nor the
Jews significantly changed this basic idea. It was killing they were
opposed to. Also in 1958 Pope Pius XII emphasized that we may 'allow the
patient who is virtually already dead to pass away in peace' (Rachels, 1986,
p. 43). How can anybody say mercy is against God? to me it would seem that
God would want people to die in peace and without pain. If anything is
against God it is trying to live longer than God had intended you to.
The United States was founded because people wanted to be free.
Americans have fought for freedom ever since. If euthanasia is made
illegal it will take away one of the founding freedoms, the freedom of
choice, the freedom for a person to choose a death with dignity and free of
pain and suffering for themselves and their families. As Seneca quoted in
Bolander writes, "A punishment to some, to some a gift, and to many a
favor"(1984).
References
Battin, M. (1987). Euthanasia: the time is now. In Bernards,
N. (Ed). (1989). Euthanasia: opposing viewpoints.
Greenhaven Press, Inc.
Bernards, N. (Ed). (1989). Euthanasia: opposing viewpoints.
Greenhaven Press, Inc.
Bolander, D. (1987). Instant quotation dictionary. Little
Falls: Career Publishing, Inc.
Caplan, H. (1987). It's time we helped patients die. In
Bernards, N. (Ed). (1989). Euthanasia: opposing
viewpoints. Greenhaven Press, Inc.
Colesanto, D. (1991, May). The right-to-die controversy.
USA Today. pp. 62-63.
Larue, G. (1988). Euthanasia. In Bernards, N. (Ed). (1989).
Euthanasia: opposing viewpoints. Greenhaven Press, Inc.
Low, C. (1988). A deadly serious dilemma: evaluating the
right to die. In Bernards, N. (Ed). (1989). Euthanasia:
opposing viewpoints. Greenha
ADDITIONAL FEATURED ESSAYS
Euthanasia Overview
The term Euthanasia has become well known throughout the country. The word is derived from ancient Greek eu thantos, mea
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
Euthanasia: Precious Life
My impression is that the idea of euthanasia, if not the practice, is gradually gaining acceptance within our society. P
Euthanasia: The Right To Die
Euthanasia is a very controversial topic. People argue as to whether or not a person who is terminally ill, or handicap,
Euthanasia: The Right To Die
Euthanasia is a very controversial topic. People argue as to whether or not a person who is terminally ill, or handicap,
|
|
|
|
