Euthanasia

Human euthanasia is an emotionally charged subject for those who argue for and those who argue against. Arguments supporting euthanasia include ending suffering, freedom of choice to decide how and when one dies, and being able to die with dignity. Arguments opposing euthanasia include that euthanasia is murder, use of palliative care to provide for a more comfortable, dignified death, and in most cases, the desire to die prematurely is rooted in depression. Advances in medical technology today often means that people are living longer and all too often suffering for long periods of time due to illnesses, and yes, this does often mean an agonizingly slow death. Suicide and assisted suicide is often viewed as the most logical choice when faced with these circumstances. As far back as the 16th Century, people have been arguing for the terminally ill to be aided in ending life by physicians who should not be held morally or legally to blame for assisting the individual. The beginning of the 21rst Century saw many bills supporting the use of euthanasia proposed in many Western legislatures with little to no success. The fact is that everyone is going to die, the only question that remains to be answered is when, how, and under what conditions. Supporters of euthanasia state that everyone should have the same degree of control in choosing the circumstances surrounding their death as they do in choosing the manner in which they live. The ethical conflicts that surround euthanasia are non-debatable, and include the need for legal safeguards that prevent abuse, to claim otherwise would be hypocrisy. Society accepts the need to "put animals down" when faced with old age, terminal illness, or debilitating injuries; indeed, many societies have even accepted the need euthanize violent criminals that are deemed to be too great a risk to society. These are considered by many to not only be humane, but just regardless of the degree of heartbreak the act can cause. Medical advances have changed the face of death; merely decades ago, if an individual's heart stopped, that individual died; however, now an individual can be revived repeatedly and the body kept alive by machines indefinitely. The medical culture has adapted the view to prolong life at all costs, frequently resulting in the elderly or terminally ill to be subjected to treatments that is futile and decreases the individual's quality of life without noticeably lengthening it. Many view death as a medical failure, when in all actuality, death is inevitable. Opponents to euthanasia state that the Hippocratic Oath prevents acts of euthanasia, while those who support euthanasia believe the Hippocratic Oath, originating in the 4th-Century B.C,. is in serious need of revision. The Hippocratic Oath states, "I will give no deadly medicine to any one if asked, nor suggest any such counsel." However, Christianity exerted world-dominance at the turn of the millennia which strongly influenced the Hippocratic Oath, and many spiritual practices included euthanizing individuals within society who were deemed to be of less value. The reason the Hippocratic Oath is held in such deep regard in today's society is because the ethics appear to suit today's purpose when, in reality, the oath needs to be updated to reflect modern society and medical practice. The world has indelibly changed and evolved since the Hippocratic Oath was first written, as have ethical codes of conduct. Those who are against euthanasia state that euthanasia is morally and ethically wrong. In most cases, the desire to die or suicidal thoughts have been shown to be clinical depression which is treatable. Attempts to legalize euthanasia did not occur until the 20th Century, and history does not provide an adequate example to why euthanasia should be legalized. Euthanasia is the ending of a person's life and presents a threat to all people with disabilities, chronic physical and mental illnesses, the elderly, and other vulnerable portions of the population.
In many cases, when an individual is facing a terminal illness he or she expresses the preference to die sooner rather than later. Recognizing and diagnosing depression is often complicated by the fact that common symptoms such as low mood, weight loss, and low energy are frequently related to the terminal affliction and medications used in treatment. One of the misconceptions put forth by the "right to die" proponents is that those against euthanasia and assisted suicide believe that a terminal patient must be kept alive by any means available, which is not true. Here one does not will to cause death; one's inability to impede it is merely accepted. The decisions should be made by the patient if he is competent and able or, if not, by those legally entitled to act for the patient...Even if death is thought imminent, the ordinary care owed to a sick person cannot be legitimately interrupted. The use of painkillers to alleviate the sufferings of the dying, even at the risk of shortening their days, can be morally in conformity with human dignity if death is not willed as either an end or a means, but only foreseen and tolerated as inevitable. Thus, rather than promoting an irreversible solution such as euthanasia or assisted suicide that impacts not only patients but those around them. Some supporters of euthanasia will make the claim that the terminally ill are a burden to their family or to society. Illnesses such as quadriplegia, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, and other physical and mental disabilities do create emotional and financial burdens, because the person is dependent on others for care, and for now, these "burdens to society" are safe in our country. The discussion over human euthanasia evokes strong emotions on both sides of the debate. Convincing justifications are found for both viewpoints. Doubtless, at times a need exists for euthanasia, be that in active, passive, involuntary, or voluntary form, and some forms of euthanasia do exist; however, society must ask what the cost of life and death is: financially, physically, emotionally, and mentally. One person or group should not determine how, when, and if another person should die. Ending an individual's life, because someone decided that person's life provides no value to the individual or to society is not ethical and never will be. The physician's role is to heal and care for patients, should murder be added to the job description?