Argumentative Essay of Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide
In “euthanasia and assisted suicide : it’s murder in the first degree”, Autumn Buzzell states that a annatural death is unethical like murder that should be charged as homicide in a court of law and for authanasias need to start with reorganizing their morals and placing their health. Euthanasia classificated by Autumn in two part. First, active euthanasia which not natural and extremely unethical. although on the other hand, support of euthanasia figh for the right to “die with dignity”. The one reason a patient say that he want to die with lethal injection, are something the medical establishment can treat. Second, passive euthanasia that another person takes direct action like a doctot. But, the doctor’s job give their patients heal, to try as hard as they can to save the lives of patients. If the doctor assis to takes an action with euthanasia, he is no more a moral professional but reather amorally neutered technician. Eventually the country will be good that life is more important. I completely disagree with that argument. Murder is prohibited in law and ethics. But, euthanasia does not need to be banned. because the laws in each state vary. Rights and obligations of any man is their responsibility to society, law, and God. Euthanasia may be banned in Indonesia. But, it is different in other countries. In social reason as it developed in the community to legalize euthanasia is not considered the right thing. Therefore, the act is considered alleviate the suffering of patients'. In the other hand, it can not be done with a social cause, especially if the patient in question still has a life expectancy medically. Patients who remain at home with family providing care often feel like they are a burden on their caregivers, and they may well be. Medicare and state and federal Medicaid systems don’t cover the cost of hiring in-home care-giving support. The physical, psychological, emotional, financial, and social strain on caregivers is very real. Chronic and life-limiting illness can also make a person feel like they have lost all control of their lives. The body isn’t doing what it should and there’s no way to stop it. Physician-assisted suicide (PAS) may feel like a way to regain some of that control. If they can’t control the illness, they can at least control how they die. The classification of euthanasia in active and passive is less precise. Morrow.A (2006), euthanasia classificated in two part. They are Voluntary Euthanasia refers to the action taken by the physician and the patient, who both agree (with informed consent) to end the patient's life. And Involuntary Euthanasia refers to a third party taking a patient's life without the informed consent of the patient. This is commonly practiced in veterinary medicine when animals are "put down" or "put to sleep." In modern medicine, it could conceivably be applied to the act of taking a terminally ill, suffering patient's life who has lost all mental capacity to make his/her own decisions. Human like animal, isn’t it? What do the ethicists say about such a thing? Not all agree, of course, but it turns out that it is fairly easy to derive an ethical argument in favor of involuntary euthanasia from the starting point of upholding individual autonomy. That argument goes like this: the principle of autonomy demands that patients be allowed to refuse medical therapy; refusal of therapy is the ethical equivalent of voluntary euthanasia; since voluntary euthanasia is a right of individuals with intractable suffering, it follows that it would be unethical to withhold euthanasia from suffering individuals who are incapacitated, just because they are unable to give their permission. Hence, involuntary euthanasia is ethical for suffering patients who are unable to give their permission. Under Oregon's Death with Dignity Act physicians are permitted to write prescriptions for a lethal dosage of medication to people with...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document