Active Euthanasia, Legal Murder
Recently, the question on whether the state of California should legalize euthanasia, intentionally ending a life to prevent pain and suffering, arises. On October 5, 2015, governor Jerry Brown of California put an end to that question by signing into law the End of Life Option Act. The law allows “terminally ill people to be prescribed the drugs that will end their life” (Unknown). Passing the bill means active euthanasia, which is defined as “taking measures that directly cause a patient's death” (Gorman), is now legal. Physicians now have the authority to inject lethal dose that will end their patients life, and such action has crossed the line. Legalizing active euthanasia will result in unforeseen consequences …show more content…
The procedure of active euthanasia must be taught to physicians, since there has been “botched” euthanasia where patient didn’t die” (Somerville). This lead to medical schools not only teach students how to cure but also how to kill patients by injecting lethal dose. The legalization would also make “an exception to the norm that we must not kill each other” (Somerville). Human beings should not kill each other, let alone physicians whose job is to preserve life. Physicians are put into an environment where they can legally end a life, rather than an environment where they can improve …show more content…
It stated: “active euthanasia, or actively ending a terminally ill person's life by administering lethal injections or other means, would be illegal.” The Court also ruled: “It would be legal to withdraw life-support system to those in a permanently vegetative state” (Singh). The case in which the ruled is made involved a girl name Aruna Shaunbag who had spent 37 years in a coma. Without active euthanasia being legalized, actions can still be taken to help those who is in need of mercy death. Even is Canada, where euthanasia is famously known to be legal, outlaw active euthanasia. Not only countries that legalize euthanasia outlaws active euthanasia. The World Medical Association, WMA, also strongly opposes active euthanasia. The WMA said that: “active euthanasia violates the ethical principles of the medical profession, and that any doctor who consciously helps a patient die is acting unethically” (Siegel). However, it stated “it is legitimate and ethical to carry out a terminal patient's wishes and not attach him to devices that will artificially extend his life (passive euthanasia)” (Siegel). If the world and countries that has been legalizing euthanasia outlaw active euthanasia, there should be no reason for the United States to legalize such
Recently, the question on whether the state of California should legalize euthanasia, intentionally ending a life to prevent pain and suffering, arises. On October 5, 2015, governor Jerry Brown of California put an end to that question by signing into law the End of Life Option Act. The law allows “terminally ill people to be prescribed the drugs that will end their life” (Unknown). Passing the bill means active euthanasia, which is defined as “taking measures that directly cause a patient's death” (Gorman), is now legal. Physicians now have the authority to inject lethal dose that will end their patients life, and such action has crossed the line. Legalizing active euthanasia will result in unforeseen consequences …show more content…
The procedure of active euthanasia must be taught to physicians, since there has been “botched” euthanasia where patient didn’t die” (Somerville). This lead to medical schools not only teach students how to cure but also how to kill patients by injecting lethal dose. The legalization would also make “an exception to the norm that we must not kill each other” (Somerville). Human beings should not kill each other, let alone physicians whose job is to preserve life. Physicians are put into an environment where they can legally end a life, rather than an environment where they can improve …show more content…
It stated: “active euthanasia, or actively ending a terminally ill person's life by administering lethal injections or other means, would be illegal.” The Court also ruled: “It would be legal to withdraw life-support system to those in a permanently vegetative state” (Singh). The case in which the ruled is made involved a girl name Aruna Shaunbag who had spent 37 years in a coma. Without active euthanasia being legalized, actions can still be taken to help those who is in need of mercy death. Even is Canada, where euthanasia is famously known to be legal, outlaw active euthanasia. Not only countries that legalize euthanasia outlaws active euthanasia. The World Medical Association, WMA, also strongly opposes active euthanasia. The WMA said that: “active euthanasia violates the ethical principles of the medical profession, and that any doctor who consciously helps a patient die is acting unethically” (Siegel). However, it stated “it is legitimate and ethical to carry out a terminal patient's wishes and not attach him to devices that will artificially extend his life (passive euthanasia)” (Siegel). If the world and countries that has been legalizing euthanasia outlaw active euthanasia, there should be no reason for the United States to legalize such