The Law Against Euthanasia

2414 Words 10 Pages
Although health is a broad topic, there are many individual conflictual topics that can be found when digging into the health spectrum. One specific topic is euthanasia. More specifically, the right to die. Euthanasia, as stated in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, is the act or practice of killing or permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured individuals in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy. There are many different reasons why some people are for and some people are against euthanasia. Some people argue that laws against euthanasia should remain in place because there must be laws to protect people from abuse and prevent immoral doctors from abusing their power on their patients. Others argue that laws against
…show more content…
By failing to grant this to our people, we are robbing a patient of their own dignity and self-respect. Bob Dent, an Australian man, was suffering of a disease that made him completely dependent on his wife through all the pain he experienced in his everyday life. Living in Australia granted him the option to choose euthanasia if he pleased. He could not take the pain and suffering anymore and so he did. “He stated he was ‘immensely grateful’ that he could end his life in a dignified and compassionate manner” (Fraser and Walters 121). Furthermore, a study using interviews with terminally ill patients on their viewpoint on euthanasia was constructed in the United Kingdom, where euthanasia was illegal. Many of the patients agreed that there should be a change in the law to make euthanasia legal even if it meant controlling the events when performing euthanasia on certain patients to make sure this is their only option to escape the pain of the disease. One of the interviews was with a young woman from a Dutch hospital that suffered greatly from chronic obstructive lung disease. The woman from the hospital admitted that she may commit suicide one day if the law was not changed, which was her way of taking control over …show more content…
Nowadays with technology advancing we have special machines, such as a breathing machine, that keep a dying patient alive even when there is no bringing them back to a normal living state. After battling Lou Gehrig’s Disease for twelve years, a patient, whose name is anonymous for privacy reasons, chose Comfort Care before passing away. This patient suffered to the point where he was no longer able to stay alive without the breathing tube connected to his body. Without the life support, he would have been dead. The emotional and painful suffering this patient went through of being stuck inside an unresponsive body would have qualified him for euthanasia if only it had been legal. Instead of keeping a terminally ill patient connected to a breathing tube and keeping them in a vegetative state, the patient should have the option and free-will to deny this treatment and end their life before getting to this position (“Death-with-Dignity” Part Two n. pag.). Many of these views that euthanasia should remain illegal is due to religious beliefs that only God will determine when a person is to die. This argument lacks validity and is a weak argument due to the fact that America is a foundation not built on religious values, therefore every individual will have their own point of view when seen through this perspective. For example, a young thirteen year old girl, Jahi McMath,

Related Documents