Euthanasia and suicide are controversial topics over the years. There have been so many arguments that either advocate or oppose the ethic of euthanasia. The two essay below are evident examples of those arguments and each has some solid points. Furthermore, I will present my response to the essay and also my point of view on this matter. Active and Passive Euthanasia
The purpose of the first essay written by James Rachel is to argue that the active euthanasia should be used rather than passive euthanasia. Euthanasia is the act of allowing or killing painlessly someone with incurable and painful disease to die. The author opposes the idea that it is permissible to stop the treatment and allow the patient to die, but it is not allowable …show more content…
What is rejected is the freedom to cause death whether by suicide or by assisting in one.” The community should support suffering people’s decision to live on rather than encouraging them to end their life so the pain can stop. In other words, when a physician is legally allowed to end one’s life with one’s consent, it means that the physician takes part in determining what that life is worth or whether this life is meaningful enough to sustain. This principle does not guarantee protection for powerless and voiceless people, the very young and the very old as well as the racial minorities.
Thirdly, the author also articulates that a physician could make mistake in determining if a patient’s disease could be cured or not. The mistake could stem from research interests, desire for organs, and mistakes in diagnosis. The bottom line of this essay is “even if the practice of euthanasia were to be confined to those who voluntarily request an end to their lives, no physician could in good conscience participate in such an act. To decide directly to cause the death of a patient is to abandon a cardinal principle of medical practice …show more content…
After reading them, I have become more strongly believed in my stand that euthanasia should not be legalized and suicide should not be advocated. I totally agreed with the first argument of Arthur Dyck regarding suicide brings harm to not just one’s self but to others. Suicide is considered a selfish act because a death decided by one’s self always leaves a great pain in the living individuals such as family, friends, and spouses. It implies one’s life is meaningless and disregarding all the happy memories that individual had with the people around him/her. The people who live on could have regrets and pain for years because of one’s death. According to the ethic of benemortasia, that death could not be considered a “happy” or “good” death.
To further extend my point, a meaningful life is a life which leaves happy memories even when they are dead. Dyck states, “The sequence of dying an inevitable death can be much better accepted than the decision on the part of a dying one that he or she has no worth to anyone. An act that presupposes that final declaration leaves tragic overtones for anyone who participated in even the smallest way in that person 's
The purpose of the first essay written by James Rachel is to argue that the active euthanasia should be used rather than passive euthanasia. Euthanasia is the act of allowing or killing painlessly someone with incurable and painful disease to die. The author opposes the idea that it is permissible to stop the treatment and allow the patient to die, but it is not allowable …show more content…
What is rejected is the freedom to cause death whether by suicide or by assisting in one.” The community should support suffering people’s decision to live on rather than encouraging them to end their life so the pain can stop. In other words, when a physician is legally allowed to end one’s life with one’s consent, it means that the physician takes part in determining what that life is worth or whether this life is meaningful enough to sustain. This principle does not guarantee protection for powerless and voiceless people, the very young and the very old as well as the racial minorities.
Thirdly, the author also articulates that a physician could make mistake in determining if a patient’s disease could be cured or not. The mistake could stem from research interests, desire for organs, and mistakes in diagnosis. The bottom line of this essay is “even if the practice of euthanasia were to be confined to those who voluntarily request an end to their lives, no physician could in good conscience participate in such an act. To decide directly to cause the death of a patient is to abandon a cardinal principle of medical practice …show more content…
After reading them, I have become more strongly believed in my stand that euthanasia should not be legalized and suicide should not be advocated. I totally agreed with the first argument of Arthur Dyck regarding suicide brings harm to not just one’s self but to others. Suicide is considered a selfish act because a death decided by one’s self always leaves a great pain in the living individuals such as family, friends, and spouses. It implies one’s life is meaningless and disregarding all the happy memories that individual had with the people around him/her. The people who live on could have regrets and pain for years because of one’s death. According to the ethic of benemortasia, that death could not be considered a “happy” or “good” death.
To further extend my point, a meaningful life is a life which leaves happy memories even when they are dead. Dyck states, “The sequence of dying an inevitable death can be much better accepted than the decision on the part of a dying one that he or she has no worth to anyone. An act that presupposes that final declaration leaves tragic overtones for anyone who participated in even the smallest way in that person 's