...The phrase “mercy killing” refers to someone taking a direct action to terminate a patient’s life without the patient’s permission. The decision to take such an action is often made on the assumption that the patient’s life is no longer “meaningful” or that if the patient were able to say so, s/he would express a desire to die. The means include the administering of poison, massive overdose of drugs, shooting, and so on (Thiroux and Krasemann, 448). Whereas “mercy deaths,” is voluntary and done with the permission of the patient and usually at his or her request (Thiroux and Krasemann, 184). Mercy killings occur more often in the United States than one realizes. This is legally a form of murder. Yet mercy killers are seldom convicted of first-degree murder. In fact, they receive leniency in punishment (Lavi, 145). In 1923, for example, the Greenfield’s son, Jerome, was born with a condition of gradual mental degeneration. Despite his retardation, at the age of sixteen, he was well-developed physically but he could not talk, only babble (Lavi, 147). Following Jerome being banned from public school, due to his “social and intellectual unfitness,” his loving parents, Louis and Anna, solely took care of him in their small apartment in the Bronx. As Jerome grew worse, his parents began to mentally and physically decline. On January 12, 1939, Mr. Greenfield asked his wife to go to their millinery shop to assist his partner. While Jerome slept, Louis took handkerchiefs...
Words: 671 - Pages: 3
...is terminally ill, would it not be merciful to allow the person to die? Would not euthanasia--or mercy killing as it is termed--be acceptable to the suffering patient as well as to those who are close to him? mercy killing causes no harm to anyone. in fact, it provides a relief to the realtives of the victims as they undergo immense agony, seeing a dear one suffering. Euthanasia is an act of professional support to the terminally ill patient and hence canot be held as a cruel act on the part of the person who commints it. On the other hand, there is a deep rooted belief that life is a god given gift and it is presumptious on the part of a human being to end it. As for taking it away from another human being, howsoever merciful the motive, it is regarded as playing god. If the patient is terminally ill or in a coma, without having expressed any idea on the subject, who is to decide on terminating the persons life? The possibily of greedy and unscrupuluos relatives colluding with an equally unscrupuluos doctor to kill a patient, is a real danger. Morever, though it is an individual decisiom, it cannot be ignored as a major social problem as it opens up a chapter of suffering for the realtives of the patient. Any law, therefore, on euthanasia should have safeguards to preclude any possiblity of exploiting the situation by unscrupulous elements. The Scam in Mercy Killing Imagine one of your family members is terminally ill and presumed she will die very shortly. This...
Words: 645 - Pages: 3
...Mercy Needed for the Killing? Meggie, your family’s pet dog has recently turned fifteen years of age; that is one hundred and five if you are counting in dog years. Once a playful, excited, and enthusiastic puppy has now become an un-energetic, lazy old dog that has lived and experienced all that life has had to offer her. Meggie is faced with numerous unbearable diseases due to her old age and cries regularly and refuses to take her medication, for she is ready to face her death in-order to put an end to her misery. As Meggie’s guardian and caretaker, what action must you take in regards to Meggie’s continued life? Fully aware of your dog’s pain and misery, aware of the fact that she is waiting for the arrival of her death, ready to pass on to the next stage; should you be given the right to decide whether she continues to live her miserable life or to grant her wishes and put her to sleep? Should it be your decision to make? Of course not! It is Meggie’s life that is in question, and for that reason it becomes her decision, whether she chooses to end or continue living her life. Meggie’s decision to orchestrating her death by refusing medication is a parallel representation to a wide-spread argument across the world today, known as Euthanasia. While it is viewed as an unethical and demoralizing act to most people, euthanasia must become legal and recognized as a possible solution to those with terminal and catastrophic diseases within the United States of America. Euthanasia...
Words: 1384 - Pages: 6
...Justification for Mercy Killings The jurors for the trial of Dr. Jack Kevorkian, the physician convicted of second-degree murder for helping 130 terminally-ill patients commit suicide, had to decide whether or not he was justified in assisting the death of these patients. After reading Of Mice and Men, by John Steinbeck, the readers have a chance to take a side on relatively the same issue of whether or not mercy killings are justified. The novel is about Lennie Small, a huge, mentally impaired man, and George Milton, a friend that looks after Lennie, searching for work in California during the Great Depression. Towards the end of the novel, Lennie enrages Curley by accidentally killing his wife, and George is left with the decision of whether or not to kill Lennie himself. George decides to shoot him solely out of love for his friend, but this killing initiates a debate in which the readers can take sides about his righteousness. Some people believe that George is justified in killing Lennie and should have done it, while others would argue that George should not have done it and should be held accountable for murder. In John Steinbeck’s Of Mice and Men, George Milton should have shot Lennie Small because George is his friend and knows what is best for Lennie, and he knows that if Lennie lives, he will suffer. Other people may believe that George should not have shot Lennie and should therefore be punished because Lennie has mental issues and his killing of Curley’s wife is...
Words: 1647 - Pages: 7
...LOTF and LOST both explore murder vs mercy killing. In LOTF you could say two of the boys were murdered in cold blood vs in LOST where you could say they weren't trying to murder they were just trying to help. The definition of murder is the killing of a human being(doc A). This happened in LOTF when Piggy was killed by the rock. Where as Marshal’s death was more civilized(doc C) as they were just trying to help him. In LOTF I believe Piggy's death is 1st degree. It was a act of hatred from Roger. As the book says,”High overhead, Roger, with a sense of delirious abandonment, leaned all his weight onto the lever.”(doc F) As for Simon's death you can't really say because the boys were so involved in the ritual and didn't know what...
Words: 559 - Pages: 3
...Mercy Killing, more commonly known as physician assisted suicide, is defined as deliberately putting an end to someone’s life in order to spare the individual’s suffering. (Source 2) Do you believe that if a person endures suffering they should be given the choice to end their life? We were brought into this world without a choice, and how or when we leave this world is not our choice. Physician assisted suicide is not needed in today’s society with the resources we have to live a healthy lifestyle. Life is the most basic gift of a loving God- a gift over which we have stewardship but not absolute dominion (Source 3). No one is perfect. We were all raised with different values, and our experiences have given us a different perspective on life....
Words: 321 - Pages: 2
...Opposing Thoughts in a Coexisting World The foundation of life of this world, is coexisting with one another at the same time or in the same place in peace. In the story “Twelve Angry Men” written by Reginald Rose, he creates a theoretical question, if opposing ideas can coexist as well. Justice verses mercy and certainty versus doubt is the underlying conflict throughout the story displayed by each juror with their personal backgrounds either leading to condemning or saving a teen’s life. After act one, we see the struggle between each juror going from certainty and pushing for justice only to be later filled with doubt and demanding mercy. These opposing ideas disrupt the vary balance of peace leading for any coexisting out the door. The Idea of justice versus mercy is constantly questioned and played out by juror number eight and juror number three. The struggle for justice by juror number three using laws to fairly judge and punish the teen for his father’s murder is contradicted by juror number eight as he seeks for merciful truth. In act one, juror number three says, “I never saw a guiltier man in my life. You sat right in court and heard the same thing I did. The man’s a dangerous killer…”(Rose 3) followed by juror number eight explaining his not guilty vote saying, “… this boy’s been kicked around all his life. You know, living in a slum, his mother dead since he was nine … I think maybe we owe him a few words, that’s all” (3). Juror number three is an extremely opinionated...
Words: 622 - Pages: 3
...The Acts of Mercy Mercy is kind forbearance shown towards an enemy or an offender. In the novel, “Mercy Among the Children”, by David Adams Richards, the beginning section is called “Mercy”. Throughout the novel, the main character Sydney Henderson lives his life based around mercy. Not only does Sydney experience mercy, but it's portrayed among others throughout the novel. During this essay my altercations will be based on, “Why this section is called Mercy”. Reason #1: Sydney shows Mercy towards everyone: Sydney's upbringing caused him to show mercy towards his enemies. At a young age Sydney experienced constant violence and negative public criticism. His father was sent to jail and the Henderson name was looked down upon harsh judgement and accusation ever since. In result of Sydney experiencing so much blame and accuse as a youth he promised himself that “he would never raise his hand or his voice to another soul.” (23-24, Adam Richards). Ever since he was the age of twelve, Sydney lived by his promise to show forgiveness towards the ones who betrayed or showed wrong against himself or his family. In Sydney's early years of marriage with Elly, Cynthia Pit accuses Sydney to be the father of her baby. Sydney shows mercy towards Cynthia by keeping quite and not taking a blood test after the child was born. When Diedre whyne approaches Sydney about the situation, he says, “I will not participate in the shame of one and the ridicule of another for my own welfare.”...
Words: 1564 - Pages: 7
...1) Teddy’s Supplies’ CEO has asked you to advise him on the facts of the case and your opinion of their potential liability. He wants to settle the case. Write a memo to him which states your view of whether the company is exposed to liability on all issues you feel are in play. Include in your memo any laws which apply and any precedential cases either for or against Teddy’s case which impact liability. Include in the memo your suggested “offer of settlement” to Virginia. Back up your offer using your analysis of the case against Teddy’s. Ms. Pollard was involuntarily transferred to a different environment, working in a warehouse surrounded by all men. Although she was transferred because she needed to be in an environment in which she would not be making so many personal calls, she never asked to be relocated to the warehouse. Being that Ms. Pollard could not report the events to her direct supervisor because he was involved in the incidents, she attempted to file an anonymous complaint online but the website was not working. Teddy’s needs to ensure that their website is working properly at all times in order to avoid this type of situation. The case states that Ms. Pollard’s supervisor (Steve King) rarely enforced any of Teddy’s rules to include smoking, horseplay, foul language and sexual harassment. This does not vie well for Teddy’s because he is already known for being a lenient boss. It does not mention that Steve King’s supervisor ever had a conversation with him regarding...
Words: 277 - Pages: 2
...charges being brought up against him will put a halt on that. This is a terrible crime that has been committed and no one is trying to minimize the wrongdoing or hurt that Jacob has caused the victim, her family, and his own family and friends. This is the first crime Jacob has committed, and requiring him to register as a sex offender will destroy him and whatever future he has as a professional athlete. Jacob is only 17 years old and didn’t realize the seriousness of the crime. So please find it in your heart and take into consideration Jacobs age and the future he has ahead of him. You don't know me and you don't owe anything to me or Mr. Coldon. Yet, I am asking you to be as lenient as possible in delivering your sentence. May you find mercy in your heart. Thank you, Jennifer...
Words: 257 - Pages: 2
...Essay on Killings by Andre Dubus The story “Killings” by Andre Dubus highlights the themes of love and revenge. It is a story about the crime committed by the two characters in the story – Richard Strout and Matt Fowler and its consequences. Both committed the crime of murder. The characters, however, had a different motive for committing the crime. In the end, both crimes resulted in a tragedy for the two characters. In this story, Matt Fowler was described as a loving father to his children. He was also a protective father to all his children. He was described as a father who was fearful every time his children go out to swim in the pond or the sea, or when his children attempt to climb the oak in their backyard or when they skate in the ice during the winter season. He was also described as a good husband to his wife. When his wife was worried about their son’s relationship with a married woman he was quick to reassure her that every thing will be alright. He was also described to be a good friend to Willis. His love for his children drove Matt to take revenge against Richard Strout who was the person responsible for killing Frank Fowler. Matt Fowler was devastated when he lost his beloved son. Ever since the killing happened there was not a single day that passed that Matt did not think about taking revenge against Richard Strout. As Andre Dubus wrote, “And beneath his listless wandering, every day in his soul he shot Richard Strout in the face.” He wanted revenge...
Words: 915 - Pages: 4
...To Kill or Not to Kill, That is the Question Murderers, killers: A person who performs the unlawful premeditated killing of another human being. When I hear these words, I think to myself, how could a human being just go out and kill another human being? A killer has to be someone who has something going on up in his or her head to make them crazy enough to murder someone. How could a person be that mad enough to even get the motivation to kill another person? Could an individual that has murdered someone not really be considered a killer, but rather the victim? In the story Killings, written by Andre Dubus, and the story A Rose for Emily, written by William Faulkner, I learned that both main characters have a motivation for murder in which they both fulfill in doing. However, after understanding these characters reasons for murder, I do not know if I can really say that they are considered murderers. In Andre Dubus’s, Killings, Matt Fowler’s youngest son, Frank, was shot and killed by Richard Strout. Frank was dating Strout’s soon to be ex-wife, Mary Ann. Strout was not happy about this so he shot and killed Frank right in front of Mary Ann and their two sons. Since Strout shot Matt’s son Frank, Matt then shoots Strout. After understanding the situation as of why Matt shot Strout, one might think that Matt shot Strout simply because Strout killed his son. However, this was not Matt’s only motivation for murder. Matt not only has to deal with his guilt over his son’s death...
Words: 1438 - Pages: 6
...Written in 1916 by Susan Glaspell, Trifles is a one-act play of a murder investigation of a farmer named John Wright. In the kitchen of the Mr. and Mrs. Wright, to help in the investigation Sheriff Henry Peters and his wife are being accompanied by Lewis Hale and his wife. Also in attendance is the county attorney Mr. George Henderson. Within this story, during his sleep, Farmer John Wright was killed having a rope tied around his neck. Now the murder suspect is not unknown in fact it was Minnie, Mr. Wright’s wife who committed the murder. Martha Hale as previously said is the wife of farmer Lewis Hale. Mrs. Hale is a type of woman that absolutely resents the stereotypical view of women that most men had in these times in society. At the first sign of Mrs. Hale’s dialogue in the story she is already somewhat combatant when defending her fellow women stating “There’s a great deal of work to be done on a farm”, “Those towels get dirty awful quick. Men’s hands aren’t as clean as they might be” (Glaspell. Speech 32 & 34). This moment in the play is part of a small exchange between Martha and the attorney. Towards the end of the play, Martha Hale begins to become sympathetic towards Mrs. Wright. Although all evidence points to Mrs. Wright being the killer, Mrs. Hale remembers Minnie Wright as a sweet, lovely and cheerful girl, “She-come to think of it, she kind of like a bird herself-real sweet and pretty, but kind of timid and-fluttery. How-she-did-change.” (Glaspell. Speech...
Words: 396 - Pages: 2
...vaulting ambition”(1.7). This shows that the only thing that is influencing Macbeth’s actions is his ambition; however, having ambition as his only drive results in him being unaware of the damage he is causing in the world around him. Macbeth’s ambition makes him see anyone who could put his position of power at risk as a threat, one of these threatening figures being Macduff. Macbeth knows that Macduff’s loyalties don't lie with him, so he decides to “kill his wife, his babes and all unfortunate souls that trace him in his line” (4.1). Macbeth wants Macduff’s family dead because Macduff’s children are heirs to the throne; therefore, they are threats who could potentially overthrow him, so killing them only further secured his position. Unfortunately, Macbeth’s malfeasance, the killing of Macduff’s family, resulted in him acquiring an enormous target on his back, specifically from Macduff. Infused with anger, Macduff murders Macbeth, thus ending his iniquitous reign. Macbeth’s death is directly correlated with his ambition, for it was his ambition that led him to infuriate Macduff enough to murder him. Much like Frankenstein, Macbeth’s ambitious actions were what caused his downfall. The differences in the play, Macbeth, and the novel, Frankenstein, are rooted in what drives the title character’s ambition, Frankenstein being motivated by knowledge and Macbeth by power. Throughout his whole life, Frankenstein has had a staunch feeling that he “was capable of a more intense application...
Words: 1127 - Pages: 5
...tasks. To fill out the remaining parts of his life he hangs out at bars finding comfort for the lack of substance in his life at the bottom of endless pints of beer. One might almost describe Stolpestad’s trivial life as a never-ending déjà vu, where the days are just passing by indifferently. When Stolpestad is called out to the boy with the injured dog however, he suddenly gets an opportunity of moving on with his life. He is asked to end the misery of the dog and the dog thereby becomes a symbol of progress in his life – a challenge about his future. If he can overcome this challenge, he can finally move on with his life and end the long-lasting cycle of stagnation in which he has been for all of his life. But as the moment of the killing of the dog approaches it soon becomes evident...
Words: 951 - Pages: 4
