Imagine this; you are lying in a hospital bed, cancer has taken over your body, you are connected to machines that are supposedly going to help you, make you better momentarily. But they don’t, you feel the pain in your chest, it’s not going away. You will try to tell the doctors that something’s wrong, ask for relief because you know they can give it to you. Yet they refuse your wishes; tell you it’s wrong or that they don’t feel comfortable with this request. You are inches away from something that can take your suffering away, and these people won’t help you even though they have access to what can. All because they believe it is morally wrong, they call it “assisted suicide”… Is morality really an issue? Speak your mind! Would you want others to honor your dying wish?
Human euthanasia should continue to be developed and should ultimately be integrated within our society. To understand this bioethical issue, one must examine the causes, individuals and organizations involved, the opposing sides of the debate, and the next steps that need to be taken to conclude the matter.
For one to fully understand the case, euthanasia on humans represents, you need to be aware of its history. There are five forms of euthanasia; the first form is called passive euthanasia. Passive euthanasia is the withholding of respirators and other life-sustaining equipment, procedures, or treatment and is not typically objected to by law or most religions. (Bonin) Another form is active, which is intentionally causing death of another person through specific actions. (Bonin) In the United States, one has a right to create an Advanced Directive that serves as that person’s voice if they become incapable. The third form of euthanasia is voluntary, this occurs when an individual has chosen and requested for his or her life to be ended. (Bonin) Involuntary euthanasia is when it has not been requested or consented to, yet their life is still ended....
Please join StudyMode to read the full document