Why Is Euthanasia Terminally Wrong

Good Essays
Terminally ill patients suffer agonizing pain. They are denied the right to die, and although euthanasia is controversial and considered unethical, instead of physicians denying them the right to die they should seek alternatives to alleviate thier patients suffering. Often times conflicts arise between physicians, patients and family members about what constitutes appropriate care for terminally ill patients. Issues around euthanasia consist of what is morally acceptable; the right thing to do. Is it unethical to choose euthansiana as a means to end one’s life due to suffering? Although some may disagree, terminally ill patients should be able to choose an earlier and less painful death, as there is no purpose in keepig them live to suffer needlessly. When evaluating euthanasia as a means to end a terminally ill patient’s life, utilitarianism assumes that it is possible to compare the intrinsic values produced by two different actions and evaluates which would …show more content…
First, it implies we should always act in order to maximize happiness for all, therefore, suggesting that everyones happiness counts equally. Second, the utilitarian theory weakness is that it is demanding, suggesting that happiness can not be the sole aspiration of human life because it is merely unattainable. The third weakness in utilitarism is that it is more concerned with increasing the amount of general happiness, rather than increasing any one person 's happiness. Some of these objections stem from religious beliefs. From this point of view, life is a precious gift from God and to end it prematurely would demonstate rejection of that gift as God should determine the time of death. Lastly, the consequences of legalization could inspire a castastrophic lack of respect for life, where physicians and family members may feel pressure to end the life of a patient that may be treatable with medication (Mosser,

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    Regarding physician assisted suicide, also known as PAS, J. David Velleman argues that a PAS policy could be harmful to patients and thus, we should not have a policy. In his work, “Against the Right to Die”, Velleman is not arguing for the morality of PAS, but rather against a PAS public policy. His argument focuses on the harm on a patient that PAS can have by adding the burden to opt for PAS. By giving more options, a PAS policy can push a patient to choose death. Without the option of PAS, Velleman says, a patient can continue to live by default.…

    • 1271 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Terminally ill people who opt for PAS as an alternative to suffering will continue to be subject to skeptics. These skeptics fear that if PAS is legally available it will do more harm than good. We as humans should embrace the option of PAS among the terminally ill. PAS allows patients the choice to choose a much needed alternative to palliative care. Palliative care only eases the pain. Patients are not just seeking a pain reliever, but a more dignified way of dying.…

    • 1209 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Advocates for euthanasia believe that it is a humane way of day—versus the alternative of a gruesome suicide—and that it is respecting the dignity of the dying patient. Looking solely at the advocating side of the argument, Brockney 2 individuals would believe that the choice is simple and having the option available would please the majority, such as with utilitarianistic moral frames. People who want euthanasia can choose it and those that do not want euthanasia will not choose it. However, this argument fails the criteria of a valid moral argument—the dispute is not about choice and must be taken further. Rather, if euthanasia itself is morally…

    • 818 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    “Opponents of euthanasia say that euthanasia enhances the power and control of doctors, not patients” (Life Information 2). It would make more sense for the patient to have more power especially since they are the ones with their lives on the line. We should not force people who are suffering to live in misery. The law should allow patients to choose what they believe is best for themselves. “A state 's categorical ban on physician assistance to suicide -- as applied to competent, terminally ill patients who wish to avoid unendurable pain and hasten inevitable death -- substantially interferes with this protected liberty interest and cannot be sustained” (ACLU Amicus Brief in Vacco v. Quill).…

    • 1516 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    O’Neill also argues that making euthanasia legal would replace “love with law”. If it is legalized, euthanasia can no longer be considered mercy killing. It would replace a decision that should be made with the consultation of family and doctors with one that is monitored by the government and death-sanctioning lawyers. Ultimately, a government does not care about the patient’s life, adding them into the equation would diminish the love and compassion a terminally ill patient should feel at the end of their life. Legalizing euthanasia would only cause more pain as it would introduce more unneeded stress to the patient.…

    • 1295 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    C. Thesis: It is necessary that all terminally ill patients or individuals in chronic severe pain have the option of a peaceful and quick death to minimize suffering. D. Preview: I will address the arguments opposed to euthanasia. First, I will discuss why the slippery slope argument is a fallacy, why proper pain management is not good enough for those who are in constant severe pain, why legalizing euthanasia will not undermine important health care and medical services, and the reasons why the legitimization of euthanasia by omission is not enough. Transition: Laws legalizing euthanasia will not create a slippery slope, but keep it under control so it is properly regulated for those involved.) I. Legalizing assisted suicide will not lead to legalizing involuntary euthanasia.…

    • 1022 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    It’s an act with an intention to end one’s life to relieve them of further suffering and is sometimes misunderstood and used incorrectly. Sanders & Chaloner (2007) stated it is more appropriately defined as assisted dying, which has an influence on healthcare practice as it elicits valid ethical questions. The controversy revolves around the moral validity and acceptability of voluntary euthanasia. Ethical concepts such as rights and autonomy are argued by those who favor this act. A specific request for assisted or voluntary euthanasia is treated as a revelation of a patient’s crisis and their way of informing health care providers of continued suffering (Matzo, Sherman, Melson-Marten, Rhome, & Grant, 2004).…

    • 1033 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Should people embrace euthanasia as one of the methods of inducing one to a “merciful death?” There are several reasons why people would argue for and against euthanasia. The process of inducing somebody to death can seem unimaginable but it is emerging as one of the most preferred mode for death particularly for patients with terminal illnesses and whose chances of survival are very low. Terminal illnesses take a great toll on the health of a person, and this presents with signs such as hopelessness and despair about getting back to normal and brisk health. Therefore, there is need to argue why it is justified to have people get induce to death when their quality of life deteriorates. This article presents the argument of why it is justified for patients who have terminal illnesses to end their life.…

    • 1540 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Whereas in active or passive euthanasia, the doctor or physician either takes some sort of action to end a patient’s life, including simply withholding or withdrawing the treatment need to sustain life and allowing the patient to die1. Victor: I am having difficulty how they differ ethically. Dawn: To simplify, in physician assisted suicide, the patient dies on their own terms, but in euthanasia there are some moral questions regarding whether that person wanted to die. Victor: I believe those moral questions still regard death in general, suicide and assisting suicide are objectively morally wrong because they are choices contrary to the intrinsic good of an innocent human person. Dawn: You need to think of the cause of the suicide, not just the outcome.…

    • 1601 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Legalizing Euthanasia “We control our entry into life, it is time we began to control our exit.” - Max Frisch. Euthanasia is a highly controversial debate all around the globe. Opponents argue that using euthanasia to end one’s life is morally erroneous and believe it violates the principles of medicine; proponents believe euthanasia is a considerate way to end the suffering of terminally ill people. With the legalization of euthanasia, many benefits could be added to this country. Bountiful amounts of people with incurable diseases will not have to live in the horrible pain that comes with their disease, current laws will not target these innocent people, and this country will become a better and happier place overall.…

    • 1295 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays