Euthanasia

Should people who are terminally ill or handicapped for life, have the choice to end their lives? Or should they be forced to continue living even when they are suffering? Many people have different opinions on whether a person in these extreme conditions should be able to choose to die or be forced to proceed with their life.

Euthanasia is the act of either painlessly causing the death or failing to prevent death from occurring in an individual with a terminal illness or in an irreversible coma. Although advances in medical technology have made it possible to prolong the life of patients with no hope of recovery, at times, the quality of life of the terminally ill individual is called into question.

The term "passive euthanasia" is used to describe the practice of withholding or withdrawing extraordinary means of preserving life. However, the term "active euthanasia" involves any direct intervention to cause death, such as injecting a legal drug or participating in a form of assisted suicide in which another person provides the means for the patient to die. Active euthanasia is often called mercy killing.

The right to refuse life support has been a widely accepted concept among the general public and physicians alike. There is no law in the United States that requires a competent person to receive life support involuntarily. However, euthanasia raises many legal issues. These issues often times come from cases in which parents and doctors decide not to pursue extraordinary life-saving measures for children born with severe birth defects. The problem is intensified because machines that can artificially maintain breathing and heart function have essentially altered the definition of death.

There are arguments for and against the controversial topic of Euthanasia. Many people feel that euthanasia is no better than murder and think that it should most definitely be illegal. Most of the population at present thinks that euthanasia is acceptable and that it stops unnecessary suffering in most cases. These people feel that it should be legalized. But if you were in this situation what would you do?

Supporters of legalizing euthanasia believe that it would give a dying patient control over his or her life by providing a formal procedure to allow its end and it would remove the need for `secret euthanasia'. They also argue that Euthanasia stops the excruciating pain the patient has to put up with on a day to day basis. Another argument frequently used is that financially it is cheaper if a patient with an incurable illness dies quickly so that they don't need expensive care and drugs any longer. This would mean that the money saved could be spent on patients who could return to good health.

When drawing conclusions we must also look at the points made for the people who are against euthanasia. Many who oppose euthanasia see it as a religious debate about the `sanctity of life'. Those who oppose euthanasia argue that mistakes may happen, that it is unnecessary as the pain can be overcome with pain killing drugs and that hospices provide for all the needs of a dying patient. Another strong argument people against euthanasia have, is that the patient may be unable to make a rational decision whether to end their life at that point in time or not, and that they could be easily persuaded to for the wrong reasons. They also feel that it is unfair on the doctors or nurses having to terminate a fatally ill patient's life when their main intention is to keep people alive. The conclusive point is that they think Euthanasia or assisted suicide is no better than murder.

Should a dying person experience pain and suffering in their last days? Or should life end, whenever possible, in a calm, peaceful and dignified manner, if necessary through euthanasia? There are no easy answers to these questions and the debate will continue for many years to come.

Angeleigh James

November 8, 2007