Karen Anne Quinlan, Jack Kevorkian, names of common, everyday people who have, in recent years, become household words. Upon hearing the name Karen Anne Quinlan, ones mind is immediately taken to the bedside of the lifeless shell of what was once a full of life young woman. We see the straggles of a family who desire nothing more than to lay to rest the remains of their daughter. Jack Kevorkian, the "killer doctor," imprisoned for granting the requests of his terminal patients. Euthanasia comes from the Greek word euthanatos, which translates literally to mean good death. Euthanasia is defined as intentionally and compassionately allowing a person to die, who, in all likelihood has no real hope of living, despite the fact that with the advancements
…show more content…
However, there are those who strongly disagree and with that in mind, I will explore just such a person. In his essay, "The Wrongfulness of Euthanasia," J. Gay-Williams presents what I would consider to be the 'Traditional View ' of euthanasia and the typical arguments against it. He runs through three rudiments that, in his opinion, an act must meet to be called euthanasia: 1)A life is taken; 2) The person whose life is taken is believed to be suffering from a disease or injury from which he cannot reasonably be expected to recover, and 3) The taking of the life must be deliberate and intentional. He had a variety of concerns: That euthanasia does violence to the natural goal of survival, it violates God 's commandments and acts against God who is the rightful owner of our body; it does violence to our dignity; mistaken diagnosis is possible; miracles happen; experimental procedures may be developed...As well, the patient or the health care provider might be more inclined to give up too easily. Finally, there is the slippery slope argument that starts by allowing people to take their own lives and winds up with us taking the lives of those WE think are hopelessly ill 'on their …show more content…
I deduce from Gay-Williams that the standard arguments against euthanasia are worthless, While I cannot say that his arguments do not have some power, he does not convince me that euthanasia is altogether and inherently wrong in any and every
However, there are those who strongly disagree and with that in mind, I will explore just such a person. In his essay, "The Wrongfulness of Euthanasia," J. Gay-Williams presents what I would consider to be the 'Traditional View ' of euthanasia and the typical arguments against it. He runs through three rudiments that, in his opinion, an act must meet to be called euthanasia: 1)A life is taken; 2) The person whose life is taken is believed to be suffering from a disease or injury from which he cannot reasonably be expected to recover, and 3) The taking of the life must be deliberate and intentional. He had a variety of concerns: That euthanasia does violence to the natural goal of survival, it violates God 's commandments and acts against God who is the rightful owner of our body; it does violence to our dignity; mistaken diagnosis is possible; miracles happen; experimental procedures may be developed...As well, the patient or the health care provider might be more inclined to give up too easily. Finally, there is the slippery slope argument that starts by allowing people to take their own lives and winds up with us taking the lives of those WE think are hopelessly ill 'on their …show more content…
I deduce from Gay-Williams that the standard arguments against euthanasia are worthless, While I cannot say that his arguments do not have some power, he does not convince me that euthanasia is altogether and inherently wrong in any and every