Euthanasia Rhetorical Analysis

Not everyone has the ability to control whether they have a peaceful death or not. Dr. Philip Nitschke, pro-euthanasia activist and author of “Euthanasia: Hope You Never Need It, but Be Glad the Option Is There,” feels it is every human’s right to have a serene death. The primary goal of the article is to promote the idea that denying one the ability to die peacefully, excluding those under the age of 18 and with mental illnesses, is unethical. The author firmly believes there should be laws in place to prevent people with terminal illnesses from having to suffer through the pain of an agonizing death with no option to end their life with assisted suicide. Throughout the article, Dr. Nitschke shares logical reasons, examples, and current events surrounding the issue of euthanasia.
The article begins by stating that many polls have found strong numbers
The author lacks focus throughout the article. Several paragraphs are sloppily thrown into the writing, diverting attention from the main idea of the article. Not to mention, Dr. Nitschke neglects to include any alternate points of view which cause his writing to seem closed minded. The article also obtains a fallacy based on the author’s failure to mention new medicines and advances to help decrease pain for the terminally ill. By cardstacking, the author’s claims lose validity. In conclusion, the article “Euthanasia: Hope You Never Need It, but Be Glad the Option Is There,” contains several strengths and weaknesses. Dr. Nitschke provides ample evidence and support on his opinion regarding whether or not a person should be able to commit suicide with medical aid. However, the author does not provide any additional information on the topic besides his narrow view. Besides lacking a broader point of view, the article succeeds in providing an adequate amount of support to illustrate the author’s reasoning for supporting