Preview

People Should Have the Right to Choose When They Die

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1499 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
People Should Have the Right to Choose When They Die
“People should have the right to choose when they die”

This statement creates many interesting points. It is written about taking your own life, be it suicide or euthanasia. On that subject it has clearly been written by a person with pro-choice ideals because it states “should have the right to choose.” This gives the meaning that they believe it is a basic human right to have a choice. A further meaning behind this wording is in the phrase “should have” this shows that the subject of choosing when to die is not currently legal but is likely to be widely debatable. The fact that the statement is not specific to a group of people, (be it old or terminally ill) or the mode of death, (euthanasia, assisted suicide, suicide) makes it a very open statement. Because of that fact it can be interpreted in many ways. It can be debated and could be argued by both sides. Many people will disagree with this statement because of many reasons. For example a first argument would be that many pain killing drugs can now help a patient die with dignity. Painkillers can relieve patients’ pain to the extent that they can have a long and suffering free life right until the end. On the other hand people could counter this by saying that the painkillers can only do so much and if the patient wants to die we should respect that wish.
A second argument that is often used to counter euthanasia is; a dying patient may not be able to make a rational decision. This basically says that if a patient is in too much pain they might say they want to die and not really mean it. In response to this others may say that “it is still their wish and it is in their best interest to uphold that wish.” This could also be countered with “what if it is a rational decision? In which case denying them that would be a serious moral crime.
A third argument against this is; a patient may have said they want euthanasia when they were nowhere near death; however, when faced with death they may change their

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Powerful Essays

    Euthanasia Ethical Dilemma

    • 2102 Words
    • 9 Pages

    Euthanasia is a social issue in today’s world because not only does it affect the lives of those who are terminally ill and/or comatose, and the physicians who have been entrusted with their care, but it also affects the patient’s ability to have control over their own life, whether they are aware of this decision or not, which is one of the reasons why euthanasia has become such a controversial issue around the globe. Caddell and Newton (1995) define euthanasia as “any treatment initiated by a physician with the intent of hastening the death of another human being who is terminally ill and in severe pain or distress with the motive of relieving that person from great suffering” (p. 1,672). Even though the concept of great…

    • 2102 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    “Overall, most humans look for a dignified, peaceful death for themselves and their families/loved ones, whatever their stance is regarding Euthanasia”. However, the ethical issue arises when artificial termination of life if considered. Euthanasia advocates argue that being disallowed this practice is a breach of human rights, stating that all people should have a right to decide when and how their death should take place. Another pro-Euthanasia argument is to do with mercy, that if a person suffering intolerable pain which cannot be numbed by medication asks to end their life, that they should be given that right. People also believe that Euthanasia is inevitable anyway, and so it would be better for it to be carried out safely in order to prevent accidents.…

    • 1259 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Reg Crew Euthanasia

    • 350 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The main argument for euthanasia to be legal is that many people believe that everyone should have the right to decide when they want to die. Many argue that because we can determine the course of our lives by our own free will, we have the right to live our lives and determine our own course. It then follows that we also have as human beings, the fundamental right to determine how we die. The argument of people who are very anti-euthanasia is that euthanasia is immoral because life must be preserved and protected. For something to be immoral, it would have to violate moral laws or norms. The preservation of life is, however, the decision of the patient who has full control and not the physician.…

    • 350 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Some may agree with the statement because the Sanctity of Life does not allow people to make autonomous decisions when it comes to euthanasia. Voluntary euthanasia should be an option for a competent adult who is able and willing to make such a decision. The VES argues that every human being deserves respect and has the right to choose their own destiny, including how they live and die. However, the Sanctity of Life is too rigid as it does not make any exceptions.…

    • 398 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Medical professionals already have many burdens throughout their medical path, adding the guilt of killing someone to the list is not fair for the healthcare professionals and the family members. Euthanasia is ethically and morally wrong because the doctors have to continue to find possible ways to treat the patient not to give the patient the option of choosing to die. The incident in “Britain with the nurses technically killing the patient could have been avoided” (Fenigsen, “Other People’s Lives: Reflections On Medicine, Ethics, And Euthanasia”). Although, some people might believe that ending the patient’s pain is ending their suffering, but many fail to realize the actual outcome if euthanasia were to be practiced. For instance, “If terminating life is a benefit, the reasoning goes, why should euthanasia be limited only to those who can give consent? Why need we ask for consent” (ProCon.org, “Top Ten Pros and Cons)”, the slippery slope a reality to…

    • 920 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Best Essays

    Assisted Suicide

    • 2368 Words
    • 10 Pages

    Cited: Chapple, A.,and S. Ziebland. “What People Close to Death Say About Euthanasia and Assisted…

    • 2368 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Better Essays

    Pro-euthanasia argues that each and every person has the right to die. The fundamental debate is the quality of the person’s life. As an example, if a ninety-six year old woman is diagnosed with very severe heart disease and progressive Alzheimer’s disease. Her condition would be considered terminal and she would be more likely to suffer future heart attacks. She could even die within the next few days or weeks.…

    • 1688 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    The final counter argument is about people being protected from involuntary or voluntary euthanasia. Societies ponder over the idea that if physician-assisted suicide is legalized that people will not be protected or have any rights. However, the question should also entail what involuntary euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide involves? This term is used to describe the killing of a person who has not explicitly requested aid in dying. This term is most often used with respect to patients who are in a persistent vegetative state and who probably will never recover consciousness (The free dictionary, 2012). The only state in the United States that protects a person’s right to physician-assisted suicide is the state of Oregon. These people have to be terminally ill, have six months or less to live, have to make two oral requests for assistance in dying, have to be able to convince two separate physicians that their decision is voluntary, there is not any signs or influence of depression, that the patient has been thoroughly informed of other alternatives, and that they do have to wait for 15 days incase they change their minds (The Free dictionary, 2012).…

    • 2487 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    The phrase “The right to die” means the ethical or institutional entitlement of the individual to commit suicide or to undergo voluntary euthanasia.( Right to die, - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, 6 April 2012) It is one of the topics that has been debated over centuries. It starts from the 1950s, which arise from a small group of thinkers and writers in the United States and Europe, they began to argue about the choice that allows the patients to end their life by themselves in the case of surviving with those life support, in the case of the terminally ill, and many more. The acceptance of these arguments expand in the 1960s as the civil rights movement, the sexual revolution and other social movements helped to expand notions of personal freedom. While In the 1970s, this “right to die “has became an issue in the national stage due to the highly publicized 1975 case of Karen Ann Quinlan, who is a 21 year old woman that had fallen into a coma and she is unable to survive without the help of an artificial respirator. In this case Quinlan's family wants to remove her life support but it is thwarted by her doctor, leading to a lawsuit and a ruling by the Supreme Court that patients and by extension their families, they have a right to remove her life support. (Wired 2012) As “the right to die” has became an issue in the world, books begins to publish arguing about this topic, such as Managing Death by James M. Hoefler , Euthanasia and Law in Europe by John Griffiths, Heleens Weyers and Maurice Adams and many more.( James Leonard Park 2012) Law permitting doctors to end the life of certain terminally ill patients is created too, under the strict rules and procedures in several countries ,such as Netherlands , Belgium, Europe , Australia , United States , New Zealand and many more. Although it is approve and legalize by many countries but in my opinion, the right to die should not be considered a right because of several reasons.…

    • 2206 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    As this quote explains, “it would allow each person the freedom to control the time, place, and circumstances of his or her death. Patients facing the slow progression of a fatal disease or the prognosis of living for years with incurable pain would be able to end their lives with dignity” (Stokely 1). This means that one could have control of his life just as he should. It is easy to understand that a person would rather end his life peacefully rather than in suffering such as someone with a fatal disease or a late stage cancer. The freedom for someone to pick the details of their own death, such as time and place, under certain conditions should be a guaranteed right just like the freedom of speech and the freedom of religion. Everyone is going to die at some point in life. Why should a person not be able to die when he prefers…

    • 1431 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Do you think some humans have the right to end other people lives? Everyone have different opinion on this kind of questions. Some people have physical pain that they can’t handle because they suffer from cancer and other diseases. Some people believe that doctors and family members should never be allowed, but others believe that under certain situations it may be more helpful to do so. In my opinion, doctors and families should never be allowed to end someone’s life because doctors’ approach is to save lives and people don’t have the right to end someone’s life, and it depend in which situation the patient is.…

    • 663 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    If a patient wishes to end their life then they should only be allowed under certain circumstances. If allowed then it must be after prolonged suffering from a disease in which there is no reversible cure. Also, these request should only be approved if the patient themselves has the capacity to make such an autonomous decision, as Powell and Lowenstein state. In order for it to be autonomous it must oblige by being intentional, based on sufficient understanding, sufficiently free of external constraints and sufficiently free of internal constraints. If the patient proves all premises to be true then they should be allowed to end their life. If this is not the case then there must be physiological and social constraints hindering such decision-making,…

    • 244 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    A Roman Catholic would forbid all forms of active euthanasia and most forms of passive euthanasia. This is because any act that intentionally brings about death is considered murder also euthanasia is not permitted due to your life being a gift from God and only God decides when your death comes, the sanctity of life. Ordinary treatments such as food and water must continue but extraordinary treatments such as complicated operations can be withdrawn. Although Roman Catholics do not allow euthanasia, they permit hospices because they provide a way of death that is not against the sanctity of life.…

    • 406 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Some people would agree with this statement because they believe that life should never be taken using artificial means. Life is sacred, and to take it unnecessarily would be murder. If someone is looked after with proper, palliative care, then there would be no need for euthanasia. Doctors and nurses are there for saving people’s lives, and now because of Euthanasia, they are killing them, which undermine the commitment that they have previously applied. Now, because of euthanasia, doctors are granted the ability to kill, and if we cannot be safe in hospitals, which are places of care, where can we be safe? It is already unsafe for the unborn child in the womb.…

    • 1219 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Mercy Killing

    • 1503 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Euthanasia, or “mercy killing,” as it has been called, is certainly not an issue with just two sides, there are many side to it. Euthanasia, after all, ranges from simply allowing an individual to die naturally without life support or “pulling the plug” (passive euthanasia), all the way to Jack Kevorkian’s suicide machine (active euthanasia). To complicate things further, there is also voluntary euthanasia, “Cases in which patient requests to be killed, and dies as a result of action taken by another person,” involuntary euthanasia; “cases in which no action is requested because the patient is unconscious, senile, or otherwise incapable of making a request, but the person is allowed to die or is killed,” and nonvoluntary euthanasia; “cases in which a conscious, terminally ill patient states that they do not want to die, but is allowed to die or is killed anyway” (http://valdosta.peachnet.edu). While an individual may advocate one form of euthanasia, it is not uncommon for the same person to be completely against another form. There are cases in which euthanasia is wrong, especially…

    • 1503 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays