Active Euthanasia, Legal Murder
Recently, the question on whether the state of California should legalize euthanasia, intentionally ending a life to prevent pain and suffering, arises. On October 5, 2015, governor Jerry Brown of California put an end to that question by signing into law the End of Life Option Act. The law allows “terminally ill people to be prescribed the drugs that will end their life” (All things considered). It is written: “provide that nothing in its provisions is to be construed to authorize ending a patient’s life by lethal injection, mercy killing, or active euthanasia”. Even though the law did not legalize active euthanasia, which is defined as “taking measures that directly cause a patient 's death” (Gorman), it didn’t …show more content…
Passive euthanasia means “allowing a patient to die by withholding treatment” (Gorman), which is hugely different from actively causing it. Further clarification is presented in the following common case in hospitals: A suffering patient on a respirator declares that he wants to end his life. If the doctor turns off the system then he becomes an active factor in the death of the patient. In order to avoid direct involvement, the doctor can wait until the patient needs more supplies, which means the respirator needs to be adjusted to a higher level. By omitting to do so, the patient dies by not getting enough supplies. This prevents him from further suffering. What the doctor did above is classified as “omission” rather than “action” and therefore separates passive euthanasia from active …show more content…
This means a majority of doctors are against the legislation, while the public is heavily in favor of legalizing euthanasia. Even experts who support euthanasia disregard active euthanasia. Sumit Ray, senior consultant and vice-chairman, critical care medicine, at New Delhi 's Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, states that “a discussion on active euthanasia is important” (Mint). Professor Sushma Bhatnagar, who is the head of pain and palliative care at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, agrees that “there should be a limit to aggressive treatment.”(Mint) When the issue is about life and death, the decision of the experts, doctors, and professors should be more respectable than that of the
Recently, the question on whether the state of California should legalize euthanasia, intentionally ending a life to prevent pain and suffering, arises. On October 5, 2015, governor Jerry Brown of California put an end to that question by signing into law the End of Life Option Act. The law allows “terminally ill people to be prescribed the drugs that will end their life” (All things considered). It is written: “provide that nothing in its provisions is to be construed to authorize ending a patient’s life by lethal injection, mercy killing, or active euthanasia”. Even though the law did not legalize active euthanasia, which is defined as “taking measures that directly cause a patient 's death” (Gorman), it didn’t …show more content…
Passive euthanasia means “allowing a patient to die by withholding treatment” (Gorman), which is hugely different from actively causing it. Further clarification is presented in the following common case in hospitals: A suffering patient on a respirator declares that he wants to end his life. If the doctor turns off the system then he becomes an active factor in the death of the patient. In order to avoid direct involvement, the doctor can wait until the patient needs more supplies, which means the respirator needs to be adjusted to a higher level. By omitting to do so, the patient dies by not getting enough supplies. This prevents him from further suffering. What the doctor did above is classified as “omission” rather than “action” and therefore separates passive euthanasia from active …show more content…
This means a majority of doctors are against the legislation, while the public is heavily in favor of legalizing euthanasia. Even experts who support euthanasia disregard active euthanasia. Sumit Ray, senior consultant and vice-chairman, critical care medicine, at New Delhi 's Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, states that “a discussion on active euthanasia is important” (Mint). Professor Sushma Bhatnagar, who is the head of pain and palliative care at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, agrees that “there should be a limit to aggressive treatment.”(Mint) When the issue is about life and death, the decision of the experts, doctors, and professors should be more respectable than that of the