...Euthanasia is Morally Wrong. Name Comp 2 Instructor School The issue is that euthanasia is morally wrong. This is applicable to all human beings as life is held as precious and regardless of the gender, age or race an individual has the rights to self-preservation (Leone, 1999). Despite the fact that individuals have a duty to ensure that hey maintain their personal welfare, they also have a moral obligation towards other human beings where they should avoid the harm towards them. This is regardless of whether one knows them personally, or they are complete strangers. It is an obligation to offer protection in good health or sickness and mostly for those who are not of sound mind in the society. This creates a sense of responsibility and the need to have people care for others other than themselves. Another issue is that on medical grounds, euthanasia is still morally wrong as it is expected that the doctor should provide the patients with the sure and care for their health despite the situation. The family members are also expected to do the same and do what is possible to see that their loved ones in hospitals are given the best medical attention. Human beings learn that the fact that underlies all this is that we bring our loved ones to hospitals so that they are cured and brought back to their normal lives. Despite the time it will take and the resources, the ultimate goal is that they have to be cured, and their health restored as well. Doctors...
Words: 1748 - Pages: 7
...selecting a topic that is of interest. Euthanasia is either right or wrong, and this will limit the options when trying to persuade and audience. During the construction of the foundation it is important to analyze the audience. Different things to consider are age, race, ethnic and religious backgrounds, and social backgrounds. It is also pertinent to consider where the audience is in regards to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, and to build on where the audience lies. The final part of the foundation is to have a purpose which defines the shape of the speech. For this speech, the purpose is to make a claim of value and persuade that euthanasia is wrong. The next phase of building the speech consists of composing a thesis statement, developing main points, and gathering supporting material from credible sources. The last phase of developing the speech consists of separating the speech into major parts, outlining the speech, and developing presentation aids if needed. The major parts consist of an introduction, body, and conclusion. The introduction should contain an attention getter, significance and credibility statement, a thesis statement, and a preview of the main points. The body of the speech should be between 2 to 4 main points and three is ideal. The conclusion should review the main points, restate the thesis in a new and fresh way, give an application or significance point, and finish with a graceful and memorable exit. When preparing a speech, it is important...
Words: 1532 - Pages: 7
...Legalization of voluntary active euthanasia and assisted suicide is a highly controversial topic that involves the consideration of morals and ethics as well as possibility of both negative and positive side effects of the procedure. The main argument for those that support legalization of active euthanasia mainly relates to self-determination in which he or she makes decisions based on what they think is best for themselves. They often relate back to attempting to eliminate the distinction between "allowing to die" and causing death by active euthanasia. Relating to the article by Dan W. Brock, I will argue that that the reasons given by him are problematic because of the fact there is a distinction between allowing to die and active euthanasia, is morally wrong, and can have several side effects of legalization of active euthanasia. Brock begins his point by giving the two central arguments that are for voluntary active euthanasia - the first one being self-determination in which he stresses is an important idea behind human dignity. He states that the rationale of allowing the right to refuse life-sustaining treatment also stands true for support of active euthanasia and reason the self-determination should also extend to controlling "the manner, circumstances, and timing of their dying and death" (Brock 166). The second reason he gives for voluntary active euthanasia is individual well-being and reasons that when a person considers living any longer as harm instead of...
Words: 2023 - Pages: 9
...Should euthanasia be an option for people in need? Known as the practice of assisted suicide by intentionally ending a life, euthanasia is a controversial and disputed subject, meaning easy or good death. Euthanasia’s medical definition is defined as the act or practice of killing terribly sick or injured people in a painless way or allowing them to take less than the medically approved procedures necessary to lengthen their life, for reasons of mercy. (Death Talk, pg. 101-102) Considered by many to be a form of murder being morally and ethically wrong by devaluing one’s life, euthanasia can serve a purpose. When there are no other alternatives to relieve suffering patients, they should then be allowed to have opportunity to choose euthanasia as an option. There are different variations of euthanasia known as passive, active, physician assisted and non-voluntary. Passive euthanasia is withdrawing life-sustaining treatments or withholding them with the slow intention of causing the patient’s death. In other words, a doctor can disconnect feeding tubes; turn off life support machines, not performing life-prolonging procedures, or not giving drugs to the patient. (Euthanasia: A Reference Handbook, pg. 2) Active euthanasia is the act of taking particular measures to cause the patient’s death, achieved by the request of the patient. Often times when it comes to active euthanasia, it is done by request. (Euthanasia: A reference Handbook, pg. 2) The difference between passive and...
Words: 1580 - Pages: 7
...Euthanasia Nicholas A. Manuel SOC120 Intro. to Ethics and Social Responsibility Brandon Wolfe 24 June 2013 - You always here the ones that you love say, when my time comes to die, just kill me and don’t let me suffer. For some people this is easier said then done and to partake in this action will be assisting someone in his or her suicide, which has been also known as euthanasia. Euthanasia faces ethical problems that question’s the caregivers medical integrity, the common argument that God is the only one can take someone’s life, and the fact that it is considered murder. I will discuss which one of the three classical theories would resolve these problems, as well as discuss one out of three contrary perspectives. We don’t want to see our love ones suffer just as much as we do not want to see some one end their life. A decision that is life threating with any decision that is made. There are three classical theories in ethics that describes the reasoning behind ones actions or thought process. Those theories are utilitarianism, deontology, and virtue ethics. The theory that would resolve the problem of euthanasia would be that of virtue ethics. “Virtue Ethics is an ethical theory that evaluates the morality of the person doing a given act, rather than the act itself. Virtue ethics thus emphasizes that the various virtues and whether a person reflects those virtues in his or her actions are crucial to moral evaluation” Mosser (2010). Where some believe that this...
Words: 1796 - Pages: 8
...Physician Assisted Euthanasia Good To Be Kept Illegal Right to decide about their life is always considered as the basic right of the individual across the world. Some people believe that it is not good to restrain someone from taking decision about their own life and it is not a wrong view. The area where validation of this basic right gets doubted is Physician Assisted Euthanasia. Physician Assisted Euthanasia or Physician Assisted Suicide mean getting death with the help of physician. Sometime there are situations in life where the person decide to surrender his life to death and in most cases the probable reason for their decision is terminal diseases .Should Physician Assisted Euthanasia be legalized or it should be kept Illegal? Keeping Physician Assisted Euthanasia illegal is good choice because of three common reasons. Firstly the basic duty of Physicians is to save the life not to take the life. The fundamental duty of physician conflicts with the view of legalizing Physician Assisted Euthanasia. The physician when starts his/her career pledges to save as many lives as possible. But if this particular type of Euthanasia is legalized then it will not only against the fundamental duty of physicians but also against the code of conduct applicable on physicians. The legalized euthanasia can create conflicts among various medical institutions because some physicians are in the favor of the question of legalization and some are in the opposition. The conflict can be...
Words: 1072 - Pages: 5
...J. Gay Williams: A Defense of Humanity Gay-Williams defines euthanasia as “intentionally taking the life of a presumably hopeless person;” hopeless meaning the suffering individual has very little chance of recovery and intentionally meaning the intention has to explicitly to be to kill the individual (Munson, 704). Hence, the term ‘passive euthanasia’ cannot exist, because the sufferer is “not killed…nor is the death of the person intended by the withholding of additional treatment” (704). However, here Williams assumes that the doctor’s intention when ending a treatment is never to kill the patient but always something else. After clarifying the term euthanasia, Williams presents his argument from nature that it is inherently wrong. At the scientific, biological level, it is natural for the body to work towards survival. Hence, survival is a ‘natural goal’. Euthanasia is “literally acting against nature because all of the processes of nature are bent towards the end of bodily survival” (705). By ending life, which is an end of nature itself, euthanasia is obviously unnatural (705). Williams does not stop there but further argues that euthanasia is immoral. He presents it more implicitly, stating that he “shall not employ this line of argument,” but he does still state it (705). He argues that since the body is an individual’s trust from God, by taking his own life, is acting against God. Hence, euthanasia is immoral as well. The crux of Williams’ argument relating to...
Words: 936 - Pages: 4
...Euthanasia is a subject that is in great debate and one that will continue to be a topic of controversy. Is it morally wrong? Are we not respecting patients’ rights? Is it suicide? These are just a few of the arguments that are of great controversy. I believe that euthanasia should not be permissible and the only times it should be are in cases of non-voluntary euthanasia, when patients are in a Persistent Vegetative State (“PVS”), and in times of war, during combat. What is the difference in killing someone and allowing them to die? With euthanasia, we might as well kill because we’re taking part in that patient’s death. We are totally devaluing human life. In the laws of nature, all things must die. In the film Dax Case, the first thing the man who was involved in the explosion told the farmer, who was the first on the scene, was to get him a gun so he could put himself out of his misery. The entire time he was hospitalized, he wanted to end his life. Everyone he came in contact with, he asked that question. The physician would not give up on him, and in the end, he pulled through and made something of himself. Though he was impaired, he was still able to maintain a life he wouldn’t have had if they would have listened to his request. If they wouldn’t have shown compassion for his situation he would have been deceased a long time ago. It goes to show that everyone should be entitled to fight for life and not give up on themselves when times are futile. I...
Words: 1624 - Pages: 7
...Hugh Elliott had it right when he said, “I am not dying, not anymore than any of us are at any moment. We run, hopefully as fast as we can, and then everyone must stop. We can only choose how we handle the race.” Our lives are put before us to run the race and meet the finish line with a sense of tranquility. The finish line, the ending of our lives, should not be determined by us. God made and put us on this earth for a reason. We should not take that so lightly. He is the only one that gets to call the shots on how our lives should be controlled. It might mean to continue living your life with the utmost humility or it might mean meeting the Lord before some of your family members and friends do. I am a firm believer in the fact that life should begin and end at the will of the Lord. So of course, I think euthanasia is immorally wrong. The American people need to know that history shows that euthanasia is inhumane, that the Catholic Church sees it as a debatable issue, and that it seems that the United States view on euthanasia has probably remained the same throughout the years. The definition of euthanasia has stayed the same throughout the years. So, it seems the definition does not change with the times. Euthanasia is the intentional killing or omission of a dependent human being for his or her alleged benefit. Euthanasia takes a life, not saves one. There is more than one way to end a person’s life. First, there is euthanasia by action. This is when a person is intentionally...
Words: 1963 - Pages: 8
... Euthanasia, the act of killing oneself in order to end pain and suffering, is illegal in the majority of the states in the nation. Euthanasia should be legalized in order to promote autonomy, personal decisions, and the quality of life. Oppositions to legalizing euthanasia include morality, religious beliefs, concern for medical staff violating the Hippocratic Oath, and fear of abuse of the act. Some states have made euthanasia legal under strict circumstances; the rest of the nation should soon follow. Introduction “Dogs do not have many advantages over people, but one of them is extremely important: euthanasia is not forbidden by law in their case; animals have the right to a merciful death” (Kundera, 1999). Euthanasia is the practice of intentionally ending a life in order to relieve pain and suffering. It is a common practice among household pets as a humane way to end their lives if they are suffering. Euthanasia in relation to humans is illegal in the United States as well as many other countries across the world. It is bizarre to think that animals have the right to die when their owners believe they are suffering and in distress, but humans are not granted that same opportunity. Euthanasia, practiced most commonly on animals, has three distinct types in relation to the euthanasia of humans. Voluntary euthanasia, which requires consent from the patient; non-voluntary euthanasia, which means the consent of the patient is unavailable, such as child euthanasia and...
Words: 2974 - Pages: 12
...saying that euthanasia is not morally justifiable, and some people feel that it goes against one's human rights, people feel that it is not ethical. There are many aspects that are included in the interest that people have in this specific topic (Brock, 2012). Some feel that Active Euthanasia is wrong because one is physically committing murder, ending a individual's life, and feel that it is wrong because it is considered a crime in Canada (Jecker, Jenson,2007). Many individuals are against euthanasia in Canada, however some argue that Passive is not wrong and Active euthanasia is, however in this paper I will be arguing that the two types of euthanasia are morally justifiable (Jecker, Jenson, 2007). I argue that Active,...
Words: 1060 - Pages: 5
...happens to a person when they get so depressed that they are on the verge of suicide? Well the only answer would be to commit it but what if that person can't find the guts to go through it alone. Well then they ask for assistance. This is called assisted suicide. Assisted suicide or in other words euthanasia is the killing by an act of an independent human being for their own benefit. There are many kinds of definitions that one must argue the fact of, what is euthanasia. Well you would have to keep reading farther on. Euthanasia can either be voluntary or non voluntary, when it then becomes murder. But what it is not is that it's not euthanasia unless the death is intentionally. It is not medical actions or withdrawing treatment. But in this essay I will give you the most frequent pros and cons of this issue. My view is that there should be allowed assisted suicide. As many people might know is that many people are against euthanasia than most others. Some examples of people being against it would be that it demeans the value of human life, which the human life could have many different views as people understand the concept of actually doing it. Anyway, in many cases, many religions do not allow the potential suicide and the killing of others. Also it would violate the Hippocratic doctors oath. Some people also believe that someday a miracle might actually happen. Lastly people think that doctors are given too much power, and by some miracle might be wrong or unethical. Also...
Words: 1003 - Pages: 5
...PHI 115- Ethics 5/7/2014 Euthanasia The purpose of this research paper is to prove that the process of euthanasia is wrong, it is against the natural and moral end of human’s life , and the most of all , it is unethical. Euthanasia from Greek: “good death” or “mercy killing”, is the practice of ending of life intentionally to relieve intractable problem of suffering. There are plenty of ethical issues to discuss, regarding this one. Proponents of euthanasia consider that death filled with suffering is wrongful and bad death. That is why these people are for legalization of euthanasia. On the other hand, opponents( including my person) of euthanasia would say that any deliberate effort to cause death is wrong and against eternal law ( God’s law). Ethics and morality, basically state the same to many people and they mean exactly one. For Instance, morality refers to personal character, belief and behavior, ethics is the reflection on morality with that person’s actions and his /her professionalism. When we say an ethical person or a moral person, that is the same meaning. Very often, in or common life we can hear both terms like medical ethics or bioethics, they both describe the same and have the same meaning. These are the guidelines...
Words: 2846 - Pages: 12
...Is Euthanasia Immoral Active euthanasia is the willful taking of a person’s life to relieve them of pain and suffering (lethal injection) and passive euthanasia (discontinuing treatment) is to cease medical treatment to prevent the prolonging of pain and suffering resulting in death. The objective and purpose of this paper is to dispute and argue against the use of active euthanasia as a cautious selection of choice to end a persons’ life based on the purposes of relieving pain and suffering for that person using Kantian theory to best support this claim. This paper will consider the ethical complexities of euthanasia. It will take into consideration and briefly explain the ethical theories of deontology, utilitarianism, and virtue ethics to analyze whether the use of active euthanasia is indeed a moral act and if it is morally permissible for doctors to end the lives of their patients by use of euthanasia and should laws allow it? Euthanasia is a form of suicide. People should not be allowed to kill themselves nor should others be allowed to assist them in doing it. The debate of the use of active and passive euthanasia and whether it should be morally permissible and accepted into law has been under much controversy over the years. Active euthanasia should not be permitted because it violates laws against killing, such as criminal homicide-the unlawful taking of the life of another. It is also contrary to the role of the physician which is to prolong the life of patients...
Words: 3317 - Pages: 14
...This essay will demonstrate that it is not “always morally worse to kill than it is to let die”. It will be argued that passive euthanasia (i.e. letting someone die) is not morally wrong and that active euthanasia (i.e. accelerating their death) is no less moral. However, the many complications associated with the legalisation of active euthanasia (and euthanasia in general) must be identified and addressed. These identified complications may be eliminated with an appropriate regulatory regime. Assuming that identified complications can be overcome, and having established that it is not always morally worse to kill than to let die, it will be demonstrated that active euthanasia should not be banned. Morality, as defined by the Oxford Dictionary, is “principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behaviour”1. Hinde states that the principles are influenced and changed by one’s society and culture but also “based in human nature”2. As morality is influenced by society, public opinion is important when it comes to controversial issues. Morality differs from place to place and evolves over time. To compound this diversity, changes in medical treatment, and discoveries which enhance medical knowledge evolves rapidly and what was not even conceivable in some cultures or at certain points in history are now commonly accepted. Developments in end of life care fall within this category. With our increased ability to prolong life, arguments can now be made...
Words: 3595 - Pages: 15
