Euthanasia Should Not Be Allowed To End One's Life

Euthanasia Should Not Be Allowed to End One's Life

What is euthanasia? According to dictionaries, the practice of killing incurably ill or old people in a painless way. However, is 'mercy' killing really 'mercy' to those terminally ill and those labeled as 'hopeless'? I am against the use of euthanasia under any circumstances. In this passage. I will explain six reasons why I oppose it.

First, a doctor's responsibility is to reduce sufferings and maintain life at all costs, according to the Hippocratic Oath. This is an oath which doctors must take before they become certified. Euthanasia clearly contradicts the oath. How can the doctors commit mercy killing under the oath? They should not forget that they were trained to save lives in medical schools. Those who support euthanasia are not doctors, they are executioners.

Secondly, a cure can come any day. Who can predict the development of medication? Take a look at the development of curing cancer in the past ten years. Medicines, treatments and operations are becoming more advanced with fewer side effects. New measures appear from time to time and become cheaper. Take one of the most common terminal illnesses, kidney disease as an example. Patients suffering from it need continuous kidney dialysis. Before, they needed a lot of time for the expensive treatment in the hospitals. Today, the treatment is done in a shorter time and is less expensive. Some patients can even own a dialysis machine at home. There is also kidney transplant in which the successful percentage is very high. There is always a treatment for the disease, unless you give up.

Thirdly, doctors' predictions may be wrong. For example, babies under a certain weight are unlikely to survive. Even they do, they may face a risk of serious physical or mental handicaps. Researchers from John Hopkins Hospital believed that babies less than three pounds, fifthteen ounces may suffer brain hemorrhage and would either die or develop cerebral palsy. In this case, many parents may have to decide whether to keep the child or commit euthanasia. However, recent studies of a hundred and fifty such babies at the hospital showed they were doing well. None of them died. It would be an erroneous decision to turn off their respirators if we do not have hope for the babies.

Fourthly, I do not think that euthanasia is the will of either the patient, or his parents and his loved ones. Take Terri's case as an example. She was a 41-yesr-old disabled woman in Florida severely disabled for over fifthteen years. She was diagnosed as being in a persistent vegetative state. Her husband, Michael Schiavo, wanted to commit euthanasia on Terri and believed that this was his wife's stated wish. But her parents, daughter and the North America's public wanted to keep Terri alive and hoped that she could receive therapy. This case was answered in court. The life-and-death decision was made for Terri. Her feeding tube was removed and her physical condition degenerated due to dehydration slowly. She died thirteen