Euthanasia is a highly debated topic that has been brought up on numerous occasions. The most recent occasion, involving a young lady named Brittany Maynard who moved to Oregon to legally end her life with the help of a physician, is only one of many stories that circulate the topic of euthanasia. The discussion of euthanasia is often associated with abortion, mercy killings, and murder cases. As with most debated topics, there are people who stand firmly on either side of the issue, and those who stand in the middle. Those who are pro-euthanasia argue four different points: that one has autonomy over their own body, and should be allowed when to end their life, that allowing those who wish to commit physician-assisted suicide the opportunity
…show more content…
Each country has laws, or legal precedents, regarding the legality of euthanasia, and boundaries for what is considered voluntary euthanasia, non-voluntary euthanasia, and involuntary euthanasia. Non-voluntary euthanasia is a type of euthanasia conducted where the consent of the patient is unavailable, such as if the person was in a constant vegetative state or a young child. There are currently no countries that have made non-voluntary euthanasia legal. Involuntary euthanasia is a type of euthanasia performed against the will of the patient, and is considered murder in every country. Voluntary euthanasia, where explicit consent from the person is gained, is legal in a few countries, U.S. states, and Canadian provinces. Voluntary euthanasia is currently legal in the Netherlands, Belgium, Estonia, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Albania, Washington, Oregon, Montana, and …show more content…
The Rights of the Terminally Ill Act of 1995 made the use of euthanasia legal in Australia, but was overturned in 1997. Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act, and Washington’s Death with Dignity Act, made euthanasia legal in both states and provided guidelines for physicians. In addition to these laws, there have been 3 major court cases concerning euthanasia. Washington v. Glucksberg, ruled on by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1997, stated that the right to assisted suicide was not protected by the Due Process Clause (1997). Gonzales v. Oregon, ruled on by the Supreme Court of the United States in 2006, declared that the attorney general could not enforce the Controlled Substances Act against physicians who complied with Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act (2006). Lastly, Baxter v. Montana, ruled on by the Montana Supreme Court in 2009, decided that there was nothing in precedent or laws that declared physician assisted suicide illegal (2009).
Perspectives Concerning Euthanasia The debate surrounding euthanasia is a complex one, rife of political, religious, economic, and legal concerns. The two major perspectives concerning euthanasia are a pro-euthanasia perspective and a con-euthanasia perspective. Pro-euthanasia advocates usually argue that a person has every right to choose how they die, along with economic and legal arguments. Con-euthanasia
Each country has laws, or legal precedents, regarding the legality of euthanasia, and boundaries for what is considered voluntary euthanasia, non-voluntary euthanasia, and involuntary euthanasia. Non-voluntary euthanasia is a type of euthanasia conducted where the consent of the patient is unavailable, such as if the person was in a constant vegetative state or a young child. There are currently no countries that have made non-voluntary euthanasia legal. Involuntary euthanasia is a type of euthanasia performed against the will of the patient, and is considered murder in every country. Voluntary euthanasia, where explicit consent from the person is gained, is legal in a few countries, U.S. states, and Canadian provinces. Voluntary euthanasia is currently legal in the Netherlands, Belgium, Estonia, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Albania, Washington, Oregon, Montana, and …show more content…
The Rights of the Terminally Ill Act of 1995 made the use of euthanasia legal in Australia, but was overturned in 1997. Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act, and Washington’s Death with Dignity Act, made euthanasia legal in both states and provided guidelines for physicians. In addition to these laws, there have been 3 major court cases concerning euthanasia. Washington v. Glucksberg, ruled on by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1997, stated that the right to assisted suicide was not protected by the Due Process Clause (1997). Gonzales v. Oregon, ruled on by the Supreme Court of the United States in 2006, declared that the attorney general could not enforce the Controlled Substances Act against physicians who complied with Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act (2006). Lastly, Baxter v. Montana, ruled on by the Montana Supreme Court in 2009, decided that there was nothing in precedent or laws that declared physician assisted suicide illegal (2009).
Perspectives Concerning Euthanasia The debate surrounding euthanasia is a complex one, rife of political, religious, economic, and legal concerns. The two major perspectives concerning euthanasia are a pro-euthanasia perspective and a con-euthanasia perspective. Pro-euthanasia advocates usually argue that a person has every right to choose how they die, along with economic and legal arguments. Con-euthanasia