What if someone choose if you got to live or die? What if the doctors are not doing their job and just choose to end people’s life who had no chance in getting better. This is called euthanasia. The term euthanasia comes from the Greek words that means literally, a good or dignified death. Euthanasia is a conscious act that leads to the supposedly quick and painless death of a terminally ill person, with the intention of stopping their suffering. Although some experts argue euthanasia is legalized murder, I suggest this is not true because doctors ask permission to take the life of the individual that has been suffering for a long period of time. But the medical field keeps changing and many new cures are coming to sight. I will examine the
…show more content…
More specifically, she argues doctors will perform the death causing act after determining that the patient’s need are being fulfilled. She writes : primarily advances in biomedical technology.” In this passage, Emanuel is suggesting there are so many advances in biomedical that the chances of dying by euthanasia and surviving are a really big chance.In her argument supporting euthanasia not be called murder, The Atlantic writer Ezekiel Emanuel argues that with many technological improvements patients who are terminally ill may still have a chance at life. Citing examples from “Whose Right to Die?”, physicians have made some new discoveries such as “primarily advances in biomedical technology.” Emanuel reminds us the world of technology is always changing. There will always be something better and newer that will be able to save lives. Emanuel argues the patient has the final word in any decisions that are being made about their life or death. She writes “terminally ill patients with uncontrollable pain are most likely interested in physician-assisted suicide.” She places much more importance on the patient’s choices rather than the doctors. In conclusion, Emanuel’s belief is that euthanasia can not be called murder since the doctors are helping and respecting the lives of the terminally
More specifically, she argues doctors will perform the death causing act after determining that the patient’s need are being fulfilled. She writes : primarily advances in biomedical technology.” In this passage, Emanuel is suggesting there are so many advances in biomedical that the chances of dying by euthanasia and surviving are a really big chance.In her argument supporting euthanasia not be called murder, The Atlantic writer Ezekiel Emanuel argues that with many technological improvements patients who are terminally ill may still have a chance at life. Citing examples from “Whose Right to Die?”, physicians have made some new discoveries such as “primarily advances in biomedical technology.” Emanuel reminds us the world of technology is always changing. There will always be something better and newer that will be able to save lives. Emanuel argues the patient has the final word in any decisions that are being made about their life or death. She writes “terminally ill patients with uncontrollable pain are most likely interested in physician-assisted suicide.” She places much more importance on the patient’s choices rather than the doctors. In conclusion, Emanuel’s belief is that euthanasia can not be called murder since the doctors are helping and respecting the lives of the terminally