Euthanasia - Free Paper Example

Introduction

Death has become a major concern and modern technological improvements have modified death by finding ways of not just alleviating pain but also extending life. Both the policy makers and the public have currently had to face various challenging debates of whether terminally ill patients should be permitted to die or. And whether the health care givers should be given the permission to assist those patients die. Euthanasia entails the practice of ending a life deliberately hence freeing one from an intolerable suffering or an incurable disease. This mercy killing is always believed to be a painless and easy death (Kalal 99). For terminal patients, Euthanasia is always a relief. It can always be done from the request of a terminally sick patient or the patient’s legal representative.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Assisted death is a case where a terminally ill and suffering individual is aided by health workers to access a medical substance which the patient then takes or administers themselves. If the patient is not capable of doing this, then the health worker, on the request of the patient, administers the lethal substance which terminates the life of the patient.

Deliberate Medical Activity

Euthanasia involves a “deliberate medical activity performed with the intent of ending the life of an individual, so as to relieve prolonged pain and suffering” (Peppiatt 67). The practice of nursing has had a high regard for and has treasured life. It is the role of the nurse to protect and save lives and many people have asked how the consideration of euthanasia fit into nursing practice (Grief 72). Many people argue that health practitioners may consider assisting an individual to find peace and get some control over their death as a way of treasuring life. It gives someone the opportunity to die in a dignified way and not to suffer.

The most compelling argument in favor of euthanasia is that human beings have the right to choose their own lives. Terminal patients should be given the opportunity to decide on their own lives as they are the only ones who know what they go through. It is not easy, for instance, to deny a very old man with terminal pancreatic cancer and no friends, relatives or family to request for assisted death. In this case, the old man has the right and will be right in exercising his right to choose his own life. I believe that the role of the medical profession is not necessarily prolonging life or promoting health but relieving suffering. Everyone has the right to die with dignity, choose their lives and the medical profession has a role to help in this case.

Permissions

Patients with illnesses like cancer can always be permitted to choose the time they will die. Cancer is a significant cause of death the modern days and accounts for over a quarter of all deaths. There is a significant pain linked to cancer and makes cancer patients suffer from severe and intractable forms of chronic pain. Patients suffering from advanced cancer always experience many symptoms like nausea, mental haziness, and fatigue.

Most of these symptoms cannot be eradicated in any way and could significantly impact the functioning of these people as well as their well-being. This results in lots of distress to the patient and could result in totally unpleasant symptoms which as not dignified in the terminal stage. This may call for euthanasia on such patients.

In supporting voluntary active euthanasia, it is always argued that, just like human beings have the right to live dignified lives they also have the right to die with dignity. Some diseases and health conditions are very painful and very persistent that the ability of the health workers to reduce this pain and suffering by palliative means is surpassed.

Prolonged Terminal Pains

Prolonged terminal pains take dignity away from such victims. Moreover, medical profession as well as practice is presently capable of an unparalleled prolongation of the life of human being. It could be prolongation which also leads to an associated prolongation of pointless and unnecessary suffering. For example, when a competent individual is terminally sick and could pass on in the next couple of months and has no prospect of cure of relief (Kalal 49). This individual will suffer intertractably due to an irreversible reliance on life-support. The person continuously says or asks that his life be ended. It is convincing that performing a voluntary active euthanasia in this case is not just dignified and considerate but also the morally justified action to take. I believe that this is fundamental to democracy.Various criticisms have been seen going against the notion of euthanasia being a morally good act since it is based om the respect for the autonomy of the patient.

Some people have argued that Euthanasia is against the will of God. God created every human being, imposing limits on human life. Hence, people should not do what pleases them concerning their lives. Euthanasia is an act of denying God and denying His rights over human life. Some religious people see a positive value in suffering and therefore argue against physician-assisted suicide (Peppiatt 78). They proclaim that suffering is among the plans of God and allows the sufferer to share in Christ’s anguish.

Besides, some unheroic Christians support euthanasia since they do not see anything wrong with doctors relieving patient’s suffering, they propose that it is good since people do not end their lives intentionally. Some non-religious people believe that suffering enables people to grow in compassion, character, and wisdom. It draws all human beings’ resources and enables people to reach the noblest points of what they are.

Physician Assisted Suicide

Because of life’s sanctity, physician-assisted suicide is not necessary. The human beings should be valued irrespective of sex, age, race, social status, religion, and their achievements. Human life is God’s gift and therefore sacred, it’s a basic good as opposed to other goods, and therefore doctors should not play God’s role (Nobis 34). Henceforth, the deliberate taking of human life is against the law except in legitimate defense of others or self-defense. Human being’s inherent value depends on existence, henceforth, physicians should not treat human being’s life as a means to their ends.

If the law accepts of voluntary euthanasia, it is not possible to control it, since doctors will start killing people without even seeking permission from the patients. Therefore, the legalization of euthanasia should be under proper control mechanism and regulation (Grief 108). A recent study revealed that cost-conscious doctors who practice “resource conserving medicine are likely to recommend a lethal prescription to patients who are terminally ill.

Euthanasia devalues people’s lives in that it responds that it is better for a sick or disabled person to die rather than to stay alive. The hospital’s administration should provide proper palliative care such as physical, emotional, and spiritual care for the infected patients when it is not possible to cure them (Gale et al. 89). Henceforth, euthanasia legalization will reduce community’s availability of palliative care, since health systems choose cost in effect methods of dealing with the dying patients. Though some states support euthanasia, others insist that there should not be the legalization of physician-assisted suicide except in certain defense of others or the patient’s self-defense. Doctors will take the advantage and perform euthanasia without the patient’s consent. Euthanasia is against God’s will and denies God’s purpose over human life. Human being’s life should be valued instead.

Conclusion

Euthanasia is one of the issues that has been the subject of intense debate with time. It has been a pertinent concern in the discourse of human rights because it also impacts legal and ethical issues that pertain to patients and health care givers. Personally, I believe that patients should be given the right to decide how and when to terminate their lives and can choose to die with dignity. In a free society, an individual should be able to choose the time of their death if they are suffering from terminal diseases. Other people have, however, criticized that euthanasia is the choice of suicide which contradicts the will of God, reducing the value of life and this will make some people choose suicide too early. Although the law does not allow it, I believe that it should be made legal so that the many terminally ill patients die in less suffering and pain.

Works Cited

Gale, Chris, and Yoram Barak. "Euthanasia, medically assisted dying or assisted suicide: time for psychiatrists to say no." Australasian psychiatry 28.2 (2020): 160-163.

Greif, Adam. "The Morality of Euthanasia." (2019).

Kalal, Nipin. "Euthanasia: Right to live & right to Key Words: Euthanasia, Legitimate medical Euthanasia, Pros and cons of euthanasia." (2018).

Nobis, Nathan. "Euthanasia, or Mercy Killing." (2019).

Peppiatt, Barnaby. "To what extent is euthanasia justifiable?." Best of Vanguard 2017: 2.