According to oxford dictionary, euthanasia simply means “the practice of killing without pain a person who is suffering from a disease that cannot be cured”. From the statement, we can identify that euthanasia is assisted death, and assisted death is never legalized in Malaysia. However, euthanasia is separate to two types, which is passive euthanasia and active euthanasia. Passive euthanasia is a type of euthanasia that let the patient die naturally. For example, stop providing food and water to the patient is a kind of passive euthanasia. A more specific example is stop providing any treatment or medicine and watch the patient dies. In the other hand, active euthanasia is causing the death of a person directly. For example, giving some drugs to reduce the pain suffer by the patient who infected some kind of disease that cannot be cured, which will also fasten the death of the patient.
Specifically, to differentiate between active and passive euthanasia, the main idea is that the passive euthanasia is not the doctor killing the patient, however, is not rescuing the patient. In this case, not many people will blame the doctor by not rescuing the patient and watch the patient to death. Try to imagine that there is a building on fire and there is a kid inside. If you do not rush in and save the kid, your inaction will probably be blame by no one. Besides, there are also voluntarily and involuntarily euthanasia, which is request by the patient and not request by the patient respectively. In the context of Malaysian law, euthanasia is not legal. However, there are many people fight against a person’s right to life to get the right to choose whether they want to terminate their own life or not. A disease patient cannot choose to suicide or assisted suicide. Hence, we can clearly see that a person right to life is conflict with euthanasia, which is also known as assisted suicide.
Voluntarily euthanasia is death requested from a disease patient, however, right to life conflict with voluntarily euthanasia. The personal liberty and the right to life included the freedom of movement, freedom of speech and expression, the right to equal protection under the law, freedom of religion, freedom to assemble peacefully, freedom of association, and the right to private property. It is strange that in this 21st century there are no cases that can actually strengthen the case of supporting voluntarily euthanasia. To kill another person even with his permission or at his demand, it may be argued, is to break the right to life, a right the creator obviously held to be powerless of being surrendered or gave up. intentionally to kill a person or to allow another to kill a person, the arguments that never end, is in the appropriate logic to isolate one’s right to keep surviving; thus, killing self and assisted death, which is voluntarily euthanasia, is equally be viewed as efforts to isolate the insolated.
There is some famous case that related to legalizing euthanasia. One of them is Mrs. Dianna Pretty’s case. Mrs. Dianna Pretty’s case has turned into a very famous case because she infected by a fatally illness, motor neuron disease, and she fought for right to die. She was expected death, and she hope to have euthanasia, which she wanted to kill by her husband. However, it was not legalized. She fought for the right to die, and her idea is that euthanasia will make her suffer less to death. A crew written down the loss of majesty that Mrs. Dianne Pretty undergone, and this made her case very famous in England. The court cases show a range of ethical reactions, ending with the announcement from the European Courts only couple of days before she died that Mrs. Dianne Pretty did not have the right to die. The argument about the 'right to die' is not the only place to come out of the courts. Although this case is happened in England, I find it very interesting regards to Malaysia Law nowadays. Euthanasia is...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document