Arguments Against Legalizing Euthanasia

Over the past decade, the idea of euthanasia has become increasingly prevalent in modern medicine. There are many instances where a patient will contract an incurable disease or fall into an irreversible coma. In these cases, some may consider euthanasia if it is available. Many people disagree on the necessity of euthanasia. The common belief by many is that euthanasia should be legalized. They believe that in many cases where a patient is suffering from a terminal illness, they deserve the right to decide whether they want to end their life early. If death is inevitable, they argue, why not allow the patient to end their pain and suffering? Despite some valid reasons, this widely accepted point of view completely disregards all the complications …show more content…
An article on Spiked by Brendan O’Neill describes a humanist’s view on euthanasia. He argues that euthanasia will actually be bad for the terminally ill patient. O’Neill claims that legalizing euthanasia will formalize something that should be a private decision. legalizing it will take away the privacy of the patient, making the decision more difficult than it already is as the patient is now subject to outside influence and judgement. 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. There are also questions on whether it is really a doctor’s job to end a patient’s life. An article in The New Zealand Herald by John Gibb summarized a speech from Professor Robin Taylor. Taylor urged his medical students to refuse contributing directly to the death of a patient. He stated that a doctor’s job is to “save life when we can, to relieve suffering when we cannot, and never to contribute deliberately to the death of any of our patients.”. He noted that if doctors were also involved in ending a person’s life, it would completely change the relationship between a doctor and their patient. A patient trusts their doctor to do whatever it takes to save their life. Once the aspect of ending life is introduced, a tension between a doctor and their patient will form. A patient can no longer fully trust their doctor. They may hide certain