Submit Your Paper. Euthanasia conclusion essay decision if a person […]. These are all first world countries that value freedom and I strongly […]. No Bullshit!! Everyone has private rights to determine to stay or give-up life.
Euthanasia Argumentative Essay Example
Fierce deliberations concerning the sanctity of life have been in the public domain for a long time. Euthanasia conclusion essay nations around the globe have been engulfed in tussles with euthanasia conclusion essay church and civil rights organizations on many ethical and moral aspects of the legislation they enact. Euthanasia conclusion essay such issues is euthanasia, which although it is euthanasia conclusion essay accepted in some countries, it still faces acute criticism from the religious realm, euthanasia conclusion essay. However, this view has not been the case as a growing number of nations have become rather accommodating insofar as legalizing euthanasia is concerned. Therefore, this essay seeks to examine the concept of euthanasia comprehensively with the view of illuminating its shortcomings to the conclusion that it is a concept not worth the attention it receives.
In order to grasp the gist of the deliberations in this essay, it is important to first apprehend what the term euthanasia means and bring this meaning in the context of this essay. The English version of the word was thus coined from the two Greek words. The word has since received heavy attention from different people and as such, euthanasia conclusion essay, numerous definitions of the word exist. The definitions may vary based on the players in the chain of actions that eventually culminate in the death of the suffering patient.
Euthanasia has become a multifaceted concept that needs a complex definition to accommodate all its aspects, euthanasia conclusion essay. However, for purposes of this essay, such a definition shall not be sought; instead, the different facets of the term shall be considered systematically in order to gain a holistic understanding of the term prior to discussing it. Euthanasia comes in several forms all of which have definitions. For purposes of this essay, euthanasia conclusion essay, all these forms of euthanasia shall be applied such that at the mention of the term euthanasia, any or all the terms could be in reference. Existing literature indicates that there is a growing public interest in euthanasia. This observation shows that euthanasia conclusion essay masses are becoming increasingly aware of the idea that they can voluntarily seek termination of life in circumstances under which they feel they are suffering for no good cause.
He does not indicate whether he delivered the injection or not, but the point to note from this incident is that first, the author wrote the article about two decades ago and even then, the request had been made five years earlier. Secondly, the patient took the initiative to make such a request and was ready to compensate quite reasonably for the service. Studies that were conducted around the same time in Colorado and San Francisco revealed that 59 percent of physicians in Colorado would deliver a lethal injection to a patient in certain conditions, while 70 percent of physicians would do the same in San Francisco Terry It can only be imagined what is currently taking place behind the scenes in the medical field with the many pressures of life that are pressing the current generation.
Most probably, the situation can only get worse. By using this incident as a reference point, it can be deduced that currently, the medical field is awash with cases of people paying chunks of money to facilitate the termination of their lives. With the increasingly antagonistic nature of human relationships when it becomes clear that one can kill by simply making use of a physician, it means euthanasia conclusion essay so many people are dying prematurely in the name of euthanasia Hurst and Euthanasia conclusion essay This aspect jeopardizes the sanctity of life greatly because life should be left to its author to determine its course, euthanasia conclusion essay. The medical field is one that should be governed by strict ethical codes that all its practitioners and trainees should be fully conscious of at all times for as long as they operate within this field.
This assertion holds because the field plays a pivotal role in preserving life, thus ensuring that people live for as long as practically possible, euthanasia conclusion essay. It is indeed a noble field; however, the advent of the euthanasia debate has interfered with the fundamental beliefs and belief systems that have governed this field for a long time. This observation is true for both the practitioner in the field and the trainee who is preparing for the field. Notably, in both cases, the implications are not good for the medical field. The training received by doctors or medical students is entrenched in the Hippocratic Injunction, viz.
If euthanasia is legalized for countries in which it is still illegalthen the essence of medical training would be in vain for the doctor will be expected to administer the lethal treatment. The burdens currently shouldered by the doctors are more than enough for them so that if any addition is done, what may ensue could surprise many. The excessive pressure could drive doctors to do it on themselves to end their misery instead of carrying out euthanasia on other people. Clearly, expecting a doctor to champion the preservation of life and at the same time terminate some lives is a contradiction of roles and the medical field would be a mess Grewal et al.
The reason for this occurrence is that there exists a certain level of trust in the relationship euthanasia conclusion essay the patient or their family and the doctor Grewal et al. This element is the trust that the health condition of the patient could improve by seeking such care. This relationship would change if the doctor were also the legally acclaimed terminator of life, which in essence would be a breach of the trust that is supposed to exist between doctors and patients. Under such circumstances, no one will entrust the lives of their loved ones to doctors, and that move could lead to a chaotic situation, which is not desirable by any means.
In addition to such implications, euthanasia can have far-reaching consequences in medical research. The reason it is administered, as derived from its definition, euthanasia conclusion essay, is to alleviate the suffering of a terminally ill patient. The medical research field has covered great milestones in the past discovering cures for all sorts of illnesses, euthanasia conclusion essay. For a terminal illness euthanasia conclusion essay exist, medical research in the area is going on to discover the cure. However, when it becomes clear that the law provides for the termination of the lives of the terminally ill, the implication is that the researcher may not be motivated to conduct research with vigor.
In other words, euthanasia has the potential to undermine the extent of killing research in the area, thus affecting the entire field of medicine. The relationship between the church and the euthanasia debate has been an antagonistic one since antiquity. The church, being the moral authority in society, bears the burden of pointing society towards embracing best moral practices. Such practices should be in tandem with the religious beliefs held by the church, euthanasia conclusion essay. Interestingly, the church has been on a warring front with most of the medical developments of recent times, euthanasia conclusion essay. Euthanasia undermines the sanctity of life, which the church euthanasia conclusion essay to preserve and promote, hence the euthanasia conclusion essay relationship.
Christians believe in the teachings of the Bible, which strictly forbids killing Best This stand automatically disqualifies euthanasia for a Christian no matter the circumstances. The proponents of this concept have always attempted to coat it with many inevitable circumstances to create an impression of there being no alternative except euthanasia itself. The value attached to life should go beyond what is currently given by many. Christianity teaches its adherents to value their lives because it is a gift from God the creator Jochemsen Letting go of life in the name of euthanasia would be to depart from the teachings of God, which could have far-reaching and undesirable consequences, euthanasia conclusion essay.
In an indirect manner, the proponents of euthanasia seem to say that life is only meaningful without euthanasia conclusion essay. This perspective to is against Christian teaching, which means that welcoming euthanasia for a Christian is equivalent euthanasia conclusion essay detaching oneself from the faith. The severity of the antagonistic nature of the relationship between religion and euthanasia is compounded by the position of the Muslim faith on the subject. Islam just like Christianity is a monotheistic religion, which beliefs in one Deity, euthanasia conclusion essay, who is the author of life and thus has discretion over it Muhammad and Fauzi The Muslims too consider living a gift from God.
Anyone who propagates ideas of euthanasia is a criminal by the standards of the Muslim faith, euthanasia conclusion essay. Hinduism, just like Islam and Christianity, opposes euthanasia strongly. To Hindus, ahimsa sanctity of life must be upheld and that the best death is a conscious death Nimbalkar According to Hindu religious beliefs, the sanctity of life is the highest virtue. This cannot be breached and thus euthanasia is euthanasia conclusion essay acceptable in the Hindu religion. The fact that the three religious perspectives all reject euthanasia as breaching their fundamental teachings and beliefs implies that euthanasia is a crime that should not be encouraged at all, euthanasia conclusion essay.
By failing the moral test, euthanasia can only be practiced by amoral characters that are not desirable in society. The concept of euthanasia as touted by its proponents can bring a patient to a state of despondency where the patient easily gives up on life and dies. This state of affairs should not be encouraged. All human beings need to understand that life is very important and should be preserved no matter the prevailing conditions. By closely examining the tenets of euthanasia, it emerges that the propping ideas are founded on misconceptions, which no one has lived to dispel. Purportedly, euthanasia is carried out to alleviate pain and suffering, and thus the question that one should answer before thinking about euthanasia is whether there is really no suffering after death.
If it were possible to establish euthanasia conclusion essay conditions of the afterlife through research or experience, then proponents of the concept would have grounds to sustain their claim. The effects that the execution of euthanasia may have on, say, euthanasia conclusion essay, family members or euthanasia conclusion essay doctor who executes it may turn out to be dangerous. Bearing the burden of being the cause of death may have negative psychological consequences, which underscores some of the fundamental issues that those pushing for the legalization of euthanasia need to address comprehensively before legalizing it.
There are cases in which the patient may be unable to give instruction for euthanasia and the doctor decides to proceed with euthanasia without the permission of a third party. In such a case, the doctor directly bears the burden of killing and psychological consequences that come with it. The proponents of euthanasia present its purported benefits to the public domain to create an impression of a harmless medical development that is worth as long as it is given a chance like many others. This kind of reasoning undermines the sanctity of life and thus it is misleading. Euthanasia proponents also claim that it grants a patient the option of choosing between the quality of life over the sanctity of life where choosing quality is opting for death Sanson et al.
It is not sensible to claim that there is euthanasia conclusion essay quality of life when in essence life has been terminated. Unfortunately, life support machines are referred to euthanasia conclusion essay this case for it makes them sound so undesirable. This way of thinking too is a misleading impression, which is aimed at making people want to stop fighting to stay alive as should be the case. Based on the three pro-euthanasia claims made, it is clear that the purported benefits of the concept of euthanasia are not really benefits, but rather just excuses by those who want the legalization of the concept. The concept of euthanasia has received great attention in the past and it will continue to do so as long as the human race still exists.
Unfortunately, many nations seem to be warming up to the idea of legalizing euthanasia. However, whether legalized or not, it is clear that this concept undermines the essence of human existence and thus physicians should remain steadfast and hold their ground to uphold their good training and its ethos. This assertion holds because human life is very important and it needs to be preserved notwithstanding sufferings for pain has remedies, which are far much better than the scourge of euthanasia. Euthanasia should be treated as euthanasia conclusion essay crime and its perpetrator should be strictly dealt with in accordance with the law if apprehended. Emanuel, Ezekiel. Goel, Viabhav.
Grewal, Bhajneek, Jennifer Harrison, and David Jeffrey. Hurst, Samia, and Alex Mauron, euthanasia conclusion essay. Jochemsen, Henk. Muhammad, Yusuf, and Muhammed Fauzi. Sanson, Ann, Elizabeth Dickens, Beatrice Melita, Mary Nixon, Justin Rowe, Anne Tudor, and Michael Tyrell, euthanasia conclusion essay. Terry, Peter. Need a custom Essay sample written from scratch by professional specifically for you? certified writers online. Euthanasia Concept.
army essay
Call Now! Order now. Search for:. Order now! Get Custom Essay from:. Free essay sample on the given topic "Advantages Of Studying Locally". Written by academic experts with 10 years of experience. Free essay samples on the given topic "Dream Family". You can also order a plagiarism-free custom written essay on the topic from our professional essay writers. Free essay sample on the given topic "Sweet Memories Of My Childhood". Free essay sample on the given topic "Effects Of The Russian Revolution". Free essay sample on the given topic "Why Do You Want To Become A Pharmacist?
Free essay sample on the given topic "Role Of Technology In Economic Development". Free essay sample on the given topic "American Psycho". Free essay sample on the given topic "History Of Newspaper". He advances the case of Netherlands, where voluntary active euthanasia is legalized, yet the cases of euthanasia are very low in that nation. In the U. S, according to the author, where life-sustaining treatment is allowed, the number of patients refusing this option is low, indicating that very few patients would actually want the option of euthanasia in the U. Brock claims that polls have indicated that a majority of Americans want legalization of euthanasia, that is, people should have the right to opt for euthanasia, if they want it.
Voluntary active euthanasia could bring about a peaceful death and end of pain to terminal patients who undergo unbearable suffering. Therefore, their right to die to end the pain and suffering should not be denied. Finally, the loved one are left only to remember good times. This restores dignity to both the patients as well as their loved ones. Brock next goes on consider the arguments of the opponents and attempts to demolish them as Bad Consequences. The first bad consequence Brock identifies is the concern of patients and their fear of doctors and medicine, if euthanasia is permitted. People would perceive doctors as killers. Brock counters this charge with the contention that active euthanasia should be permitted only in cases that are truly voluntary, then no one would have the reason to fear physicians.
The second bad consequence argument relates to the high cost of medical care, while euthanasia is a cheaper alternative. However, the author claims that there is no evidence favoring erosion in the quality of care in dying patients who used their right to refuse treatment. In addition, only a miniscule percentage of people actually want euthanasia as found in the Netherlands. According to the third bad consequence argument, people may not feel determined to fight if an option to die is available. The author counters this argument with the claim that the right to refuse life sustaining treatment already exists, and there is no evidence to suggest that percentage of patients refusing life sustaining treatment has increased.
The other bad consequences Brock identifies relate to prohibition against homicide and illegal execution of euthanasia. Brock claims that discontinuing life support does not amount to killing. In addition, putting strict procedures in place might possibly eliminate or severely diminish the possibility of foul play. Brock goes on to finally recommend a system and a procedure to address the issue of euthanasia to make it free of error, foul play and controversy. Accordingly, he recommends that law should permit only qualified doctors to perform this act. The procedure should be well laid down and should be scrupulously followed. Patients must be informed and the procedure is carried out safely. The persons given the authority to perform this act should be limited and should be held responsible for their action.
The point author makes about only a small number of people wanting euthanasia entails that if larger number of people would want to go with euthanasia, it might deserve reconsideration. In other words, ethical right or wrong depends on the number of people, which is a utilitarian perspective. According to this perspective greatest happiness to greatest number of people is ethical. On the other hand, the author speaks of the right to self-determination of individuals. These two ethical positions are incompatible; hence the author appears to contradict himself with his arguments.
Yet another contradiction evident in the logic of the author is as follows: Several cases of patients refusing life sustaining treatment have their basis in religion, while the same religion is against committing suicide or letting someone else commit suicide. In addition, the author speaks of physical pain endured by patients suffering terminal illness, but what about the psychological pain? Taking psychological case into consideration might hurt the case of legalization of euthanasia because the number of patients might rise. In addition, measurement of psychological pain is unreliable jeopardizing the case in favor of euthanasia. There would be safeguard procedures in place to protect patients against abuses of euthanasia, according to the author.
These include psychiatric evaluation and definite physical signs. Incorrect diagnosis even with second opinion is not very rare, while a hasty euthanasia entails death sentence for them. It is nearly impossible to eliminate human error despite the strict procedures in place. In conclusion, Dan W Brock has offered a systematic case for legalization of active voluntary euthanasia with a number of arguments and cases, yet his case has flaws and drawbacks. Euthanasia is a sensitive topic and therefore a rigorous case and debate on the topic is warranted. The author supports the case with the ethics of dignity and freedom of choice.
However, the subject of life and death should also take religion into account because it is in life and death that an individual encounters religion at the most intimate levels. In addition, there are a large number of issues including the procedures to identify genuine cases deserving euthanasia and possible frauds likely to arise with legalization that need to addressed with more rigor than it has been. Brock, Dan W. Hastings Center Report. We accept sample papers from students via the submission form. If this essay belongs to you and you no longer want us to display it, you can put a claim on it and we will remove it. Just fill out the removal request form with all necessary details, such as page location and some verification of you being a true owner.
Please note that we cannot guarantee that unsubstantiated claims will be satisfied. Note: this sample is kindly provided by a student like you, use it only as a guidance. ID Currently, terminally sick sufferers are given drugs and other forms of support to help relieve the physical ache and mental effects of being terminally sick. If this palliative care is competent then it could possibly relieve the affected person of a lot of pain and discomfort and will give the affected person a better high quality of life. However, some argue that euthanasia is the right alternative for the terminally sick patients and imagine that a discount within the availability of palliative care, as euthanasia is more cost-effective than prolonging the life of dying sufferers by providing palliative care.
Fortunately, advance medical expertise has made it possible to boost human lifespan and high quality of life. Palliative and care and rehabilitation facilities are higher alternate options to assist disabled or sufferers approaching demise life in a pain-free and better life. God only is aware of when a life will end who are we to end a life pondering it to have reached its finish. Thirdly, euthanasia is bad due to the sanctity of human life that is to be valued, regardless of age, intercourse, race, religion, social standing or their potential for achievement.
Most of the non secular group particularly Islam, Jews, Hinduism, and Christianity goes against euthanasia as a outcome of it violates the principle that life is given by God. Human life is a sacred and a present from God and subsequently taking a life deliberately should be prohibited except only in self-legitimate protection of private life or protecting other human life from hazard. For instance, the philosopher Immanuel Kant mentioned that rational human beings ought to be handled as an finish in themselves and not to one thing else. The affected by pain is a half of all non secular life and part of the general human experience in a fallen world.
Hence, bodily and emotional pain can not finally be avoided and be challenged to take care of hope and perseverance in all situations. All human life, whether or not in the womb or outside, is a sacred and God-given price such that mercy killing euthanizing is morally impermissible. The notion of sacred life lays behind almost all faiths or religious teaching on the problem of euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide. Everyone has private rights to determine to stay or give-up life. People usually are not allowed to take their very own lives in their arms. Euthanasia turns into a means of health care cost containment and by legalizing will start utilizing it for his or her profit. Old, senile people who are difficult to be taken care off will be put for euthanasia to assist their households save money by paying their hospital payments.
Euthanasia will also become non-voluntary because Organizations working for organ transplantation will play a vital function in placing folks to euthanasia to get their organs for transplantation. Moreover, if ladies going through depression is being encouraged to commit suicide and some doctor is assigned to make up her thoughts for it then how can we decide whether or not it was a voluntary euthanasia out of the ladies own will or something which she was inspired to do y her practitioner. There will be unlimited problems if euthanasia will be legalized in any of its varieties. In the previous proponents of euthanasia are inclined to argue on the grounds of compassion. However, as palliative and social care improve, this argument becomes less necessary. It can also be increasingly clear hospice professionals that suffering turns into less necessary.
It is also more and more clear from hospice professionals that struggling can have a number of dimensions, many of which could be relieved, as an example, via the restoration of a relationship. Interestingly, the drawbacks of healthcare providers find themselves in a more sophisticated state of affairs. They need to speculate more in their sufferers, and communication is time-consuming. The healthcare system is mostly primarily based on treating the illness, however at the end of life the paradigm shifts from the illness to the patient, and the patient is on the center of care.
No comments:
Post a Comment