Reflection On Physician Assisted Suicide

During my first summer break in high school, I went to a three-day long debate boot camp. I was really excited because it was the first time I was participating in that sort of event. On the first day, I and my friends introduced ourselves to participants from different schools. Among them, a guy caught my attention because he had a British accent so, I was keen to debate with him. Soon after the introduction session, we were assigned into six groups and Paul (the guy with the accent) was in a different group.

The camp went unexpectedly delightful. As cliché as it sounds, the best is saved for the last; my last day was the most memorable and entertaining. My team had a debate against Paul’s team on the prompt, "Should euthanasia be legal?"

Having been raised in a Hindu family, I had learned that taking a life is not morally justifiable. Killing someone for to protect one’s dharma or upholding the righteousness, however, is permissible. An act of killing a bed-ridden person was not an acceptable excuse of safeguarding righteousness. Hence, my upbringing had established the notion that physician-assisted suicide is a sinful act and sullies one’s dharma.
Before the debate — no matter what supporting points he gives, it is still a murder — I thought. Until then, I was against the objectives of euthanasia. But my debate with Paul partially changed my view. According to him, we can never know the pain and difficulty of patients who choose euthanasia. Moreover, they are aware of the fact that their malady has no further treatment. Hence it would be fair to completely end the disease instead of dealing with the intractable cures. Of course, I was startled when he said this because I do not think anyone has the right to take such a huge