Euthanasia is the intended killing of another person with the intention of ending an individuals suffering with their request. Euthanasia has three different decisions: Voluntary, Non-Voluntary, and Involuntary. Each of these decisions either have active or passive causes of death. Physician assisted suicide is when a physician provides the patient with the substance and/or tells them how to end their life with it. Along with giving them the substance, they are aware that the patient may commit suicide. Though they are both sound similar in that they both lead to an individual 's death. However, in euthanasia it is someone else, not the individual themselves, who ends the persons life. In physician assisted suicide it is the actual person
…show more content…
Somerville offers a perspective of the impacts euthanasia would have if it became legal. She argues that if euthanization were to be allowed, we would need to be careful in our definition. In 1985, the Netherland’s definition only limited euthanasia to voluntary, not involuntary. Since involuntary euthanasia was not included in the definition, the guidelines that were placed did not have to be used. Our definitions “... are not just innocent tools that allow us to describe reality. Rather they shape our perceptions of reality” (Somerville 27). If the definition of euthanasia is broad it can be interpreted different ways which can lead to improper use. This is crucial for our medical …show more content…
In a 2013 paper by Jessica Stern in “Euthanasia and the Terminally Ill”, Stern argues that we should have control over how we want to die. She claims that “ It is not ethical for the state to be able to tell its citizens how to treat their body and when they are allowed to die”. While it may not be ethical, it protects citizens from being exposed to malpractices that would be used if either one were legal. Even though not all doctors have bad intentions, in the end, it is not worth the risk to allow even one to misuse
Somerville offers a perspective of the impacts euthanasia would have if it became legal. She argues that if euthanization were to be allowed, we would need to be careful in our definition. In 1985, the Netherland’s definition only limited euthanasia to voluntary, not involuntary. Since involuntary euthanasia was not included in the definition, the guidelines that were placed did not have to be used. Our definitions “... are not just innocent tools that allow us to describe reality. Rather they shape our perceptions of reality” (Somerville 27). If the definition of euthanasia is broad it can be interpreted different ways which can lead to improper use. This is crucial for our medical …show more content…
In a 2013 paper by Jessica Stern in “Euthanasia and the Terminally Ill”, Stern argues that we should have control over how we want to die. She claims that “ It is not ethical for the state to be able to tell its citizens how to treat their body and when they are allowed to die”. While it may not be ethical, it protects citizens from being exposed to malpractices that would be used if either one were legal. Even though not all doctors have bad intentions, in the end, it is not worth the risk to allow even one to misuse