Euthanasia of humans and physician-assisted suicide are two sides of the same controversial coin. If a person has no chance of returning to their normal life after a physical or mental illness, some say that they should have the right to decide to end their life. This topic is highly debated, both among medical professionals and average citizens. Some think that any form of euthanasia is wrong, no discussion required. They believe that killing someone is murder, without taking in the circumstances surrounding the death or the person’s actual means of death. Others look at the evidence and form the opinion that a person should have the right to decide if their life is to end and that any physician that may assist in the procedure is only doing
…show more content…
Active euthanasia takes place in a hospital setting, where the patient can be cared for without interruption if something goes wrong. In PAS, if the lethal dose is not enough or the patient reacts badly, getting them to a hospital in time for treatment may be difficult. This gap in time could cause the patient to die in pain or go into a coma, rather than pass quickly and peacefully. Active euthanasia has been around for decades, but until recently has been termed murder regardless of circumstance. Physician-assisted suicide is a more recent development and is still being scrutinized by the public, but allows the patient the comfort of deciding when and where they will die. They can also change their minds up to the last minute, and do not have to take the dose at all if they decide not …show more content…
They fear that if legislation is passed on the issue, the government will have a large part in making the decision (Gittelman 4). They question whether terminal illness is a necessity for the euthanasia, or is just suffering enough of a reason? Opponents are afraid that, should suffering be the only concern, people will be unnecessarily euthanized because it is cheaper for the patient to die than to continue treatment on a person who does not want to live. They also believe that there is too much potential for the law to be abused by physicians, since racism is becoming more common and the country’s financial problems are too large to ignore. Also, social pressure or lack of funds for treatment could influence a person to request PAS when it is unnecessary (Dixon). Proponents take a positive stance on this debate, stating that euthanizing a patient at their request saves money that otherwise would have been used on unwanted treatment (Gittelman
Active euthanasia takes place in a hospital setting, where the patient can be cared for without interruption if something goes wrong. In PAS, if the lethal dose is not enough or the patient reacts badly, getting them to a hospital in time for treatment may be difficult. This gap in time could cause the patient to die in pain or go into a coma, rather than pass quickly and peacefully. Active euthanasia has been around for decades, but until recently has been termed murder regardless of circumstance. Physician-assisted suicide is a more recent development and is still being scrutinized by the public, but allows the patient the comfort of deciding when and where they will die. They can also change their minds up to the last minute, and do not have to take the dose at all if they decide not …show more content…
They fear that if legislation is passed on the issue, the government will have a large part in making the decision (Gittelman 4). They question whether terminal illness is a necessity for the euthanasia, or is just suffering enough of a reason? Opponents are afraid that, should suffering be the only concern, people will be unnecessarily euthanized because it is cheaper for the patient to die than to continue treatment on a person who does not want to live. They also believe that there is too much potential for the law to be abused by physicians, since racism is becoming more common and the country’s financial problems are too large to ignore. Also, social pressure or lack of funds for treatment could influence a person to request PAS when it is unnecessary (Dixon). Proponents take a positive stance on this debate, stating that euthanizing a patient at their request saves money that otherwise would have been used on unwanted treatment (Gittelman