You're at the vet's office waiting for your dog to finish his checkup and the vet comes running out saying he needs to talk to you about your dog. He tells you, your dog has a very strong cancer and will be able to make it a couple of suffering months. Would you put him down to end the suffering? In the novel Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck, there was something similar. George is one of the main characters with a brotherly like friend named Lennie and he was as dumb as a doornail. He follows George around anywhere. One day, Lennnie got into an accident where he killed Curleys, a cocky fighter, wife. George must make a big decision on whether he should “take care” of Lennie or hope Curley doesn't find him and shoot Lennie himself. This
…show more content…
Terri Shiavo was a patient with less than half the normal size brain without a treatment. Her family was on both sides of the mercy killing argument. Micheal Shiavo’s, husband of Terri, attorney, George Felos, said, “Terri could not be fed by mouth, that no rehabilitation or therapy could improve her condition” (Bauers). If Terri lived it would be cruel for both her and her family. They had a good reason to let her pass. The hey will always have a good reason with these debates. Brain experts explained, “Brain experts who read the autopsy praised its thoroughness and agreed that it showed extensive damage from which there was no hope of recovery” (Copeland). With this case, Terri already had no hope.
Mercy killing is helping people with the suffering and letting them go peacefully. It is a very hard decision but the family and close friends get to decide. Although, there are some downsides to mercy killing including that it is still there and that the person getting killed doesn't get the choice. “Assisted death creates new paths of abuse for elders, for people with disabilities, and for other socially devalued people” (Schadenberg). Yes, this type of killing is taking people's choices away, but actually, mercy killing is more of helping the other patient then being selfish and letting them suffer
Terri Shiavo was a patient with less than half the normal size brain without a treatment. Her family was on both sides of the mercy killing argument. Micheal Shiavo’s, husband of Terri, attorney, George Felos, said, “Terri could not be fed by mouth, that no rehabilitation or therapy could improve her condition” (Bauers). If Terri lived it would be cruel for both her and her family. They had a good reason to let her pass. The hey will always have a good reason with these debates. Brain experts explained, “Brain experts who read the autopsy praised its thoroughness and agreed that it showed extensive damage from which there was no hope of recovery” (Copeland). With this case, Terri already had no hope.
Mercy killing is helping people with the suffering and letting them go peacefully. It is a very hard decision but the family and close friends get to decide. Although, there are some downsides to mercy killing including that it is still there and that the person getting killed doesn't get the choice. “Assisted death creates new paths of abuse for elders, for people with disabilities, and for other socially devalued people” (Schadenberg). Yes, this type of killing is taking people's choices away, but actually, mercy killing is more of helping the other patient then being selfish and letting them suffer