Euthanasia has stirred much controversy over whether the practice is morally right or wrong all throughout the

world. Some see euthanasia as a fast, permanent solution to their problems such as extreme, mental, and emotional pain, or being in a vegetative state. The patient is usually beyond saving and it becomes the choice of family by the suggestion of doctors to end life support(Cangialosi) Life support can become overwhelmingly stressful on a family that might not want to go through the turmoil. I support euthanasia with certain restrictions. I believe that it can benefit the patient and family as long as there are strict steps and guidelines. Should euthanasia be legalized for terminally ill patients or should nobody but God have the right to decide on life and death? Also known as mercy killing, euthanasia can be classified into different types. Voluntary euthanasia is when the patient is aware of the decision or requests for this to be done. This is the form I find has the least amount of controversy but still sparks much debate. In cases were the pati ent may need assistance is the second party legally culpable? There are also religious conflicts that tend to be more of an internal struggle. All and all I find the people tend to accept euthanasia more readily in these cases. Second we have involuntary euthanasia is performed without the consent of the patient and left up to family to make the decision for them . These two types can be either passive or active. Active euthanasia is when some lethal drugs are used to make the death approach faster. One example of this would be taking an overdose of pills. Passive euthanasia occurs when any type of medical

treatment is withheld from the patient with the intention of letting the patient die naturally when their time is up. Withholding fluids or foods that have to be administered through a tube would be an example of passive. Passive euthanasia has come about recently when a husband chose to stop intravenously feeding his wife after a tragic accident left his wife severely disabled. This was much to the dismay of the womans mother and family. After a long legal battle the court decided the husband had the final say. This happened in the Terri Schiavo and Karen Weber cases. Nevertheless who makes the decision is a different topic all together, but I believe these women were better served by being allowed to die, so why not let them die when death is inevitable. We have, what is seen as mercy on animals to relive them of suffering shouldnt the human species have the same rights. Animal euthanasia, which is the mercy killing of animals, is completely legal. Not only is it legal it is considered the moral thing t o do. A horse brakes his leg or a family pet his gotten old. So why is it that the killing of animals are accepted but not human beings? Human euthanasia is illegal and a punishable crime, whereas animal euthanasia is sometimes mandatory. Many pets are put to sleep for various reasons. This is very painless for them and we are denying this to ourselves. Animals may not have the intellig ence like human, b ut dont we all feel?

With health care being one of Americas main issues , many patients incur outrageous medical bills that they cannot afford. One way for these terminally ill patients to avoid these bills would be euthanasia. While many contest finances should never play a part in life or death matters the reality is that medical bills can and has ruined many family finances. After these people pass away the medical cost are left to family members , but is this fair to them? Patients that are unable to contribute to these finances are a cost with no benefits. They should be able to end their lives peacefully instead of dragging out a long painful death that will only put the family in an enormous debt. Families of patients that are brain dead and fall into coma are giving the choice to use life support. In the United States this is completely legal. But is this not the same as euthanasia? Here you have a person whose death is being prolonged with the use of a machine. With this machine taken away there is very minimal chance of survival. So why not give these patients who have the same chance of survival an option of ending a painful lifestyle peaceful ly. In fact looking at the two situations coma patients have a greater likelihood of waking up and living. Terminally ill patients are given a length of time where they have to live. So why is it that the patient with the better chan ce o f living has an opportunity to die and the patient that is likely to die doesnt ? How could this be morally right? ? But who can really be the judge of what is morally acceptable or not?

But when dealing with hospitals the health care providers arent simply looking at what is moral or not. Doctors and nurses would be against this justification for the straightforward fact that they are there to save lives not to end them. Families also need to think are these medical staffs only looking at their financial intake? The shorter the hospital patients stay the less money the hospital makes. They may argue that with this option patients will never have a will to live. However this is why it will only be available to terminally ill patients with a short life expectancy. Whether there is a possibility of remission or recovery with other advanced treatments. Implementing euthanasia would mean many unlawful deaths that could have well survived later, but this decision would be made with careful thought by loved ones. Another group of people that perceive euthanasia to be morally unacceptable are religious people. Many religions believe that it should only be left in the hands of God. Christians would look at this as unmoral because of the sixth commandment Thou shall not kill. The taking of a life is murder and this goes against everything they stand for. They believe that people are made in the image of God and what we do here on earth will affect our eternal life. Our love and support for patients in PVS should be modeled on Gods love, which is based not on their current ability to act and respond but on their perduring dignity as human beings, made in His image and likeness and facing an ultimate destiny with Him. Earthly life is not the highest of all goods, and

our hope in eternal life puts in proper perspective all disproportionate and burdensome efforts to sustain life. However, life is the first and most basic good of the human person, the condition for all others: Life is always a good . The way we treat this life here and now especially the life of those who are most helpless and least able to care for themselves has consequences for our own eternal destiny.(Rigali) But if people are only supposed to die at the hand of God, why is capital punishment legal? People that are put on death row may have a long life ahead of them. If we look at it through a religious standpoint it is unmoral. Yes these people have been found guilty of these gruesome crimes but who are we to take away their life for it? Are we not also murderers with a reason? Capital punishment is accepted because it allows socie ty to feel safer. But how can we accept death for the sake of feeling safe and not for the happiness of a sick individual? Whose moral compass are we using regarding life and death. What about abortions were the choice of death is made for a fetus. Patients are destined to die a painful death without getting the easy way out. At the same time the sinful malicious people who may be falsely accused are sentenced to a fast painless death. How could this be morally right? Although euthanasia should be an option for terminally ill patients it should not be a first choice. Depending on how long the doctor gives the patient to live and what degree of suffering a terminal illness will inflicts on a patient. Especially in case where a patient has sound jud gment and is clearly

capable of making his or her own medical decisions. While I feel that extensive psychiatric evaluation and counseling should accompany any one who has to make this complex choice; but it should be a viable option. Dating years back famous philosophers had different viewpoints on morality. English, Philosopher John Stuart Mill, based his philosophy on the greatest happiness principle. This idea stated that everything was done for some type of better good. In other words, this suggest s that the ends justify the means. Depending on the end result of a situation, the means of the reasons for doing it is justified. If an end result is the termination of suffering, torture, and misery that brings about a sense of peace, closure, and happi ness then euthanasia is legitimized. According to this greater happiness principle the act of killing this ill patient is bring about more happiness then allowing them to live. This would be a moral act. Pathologist Dr. Jack Kevorkian, also known as Dr, Death, assisted 130 people in killing themselves. The controversial doctor raised many legal and medical issues. Was the doctor a hero for those he assisted to their final resting place or an overzealous mad man yielding the power of God committing murder? In my opinion he was the ladder. I often think of my own mortality and what I would want for myself if I were incapacitated and unable to express myself. AS a result I have told others of my wishes but if this scenario were to occur my family would have no

means of carrying out my wishes. For people who have been in just this predicament Dr. Kevorkian has been a savior, affording people the chance to die without a prolonged period of suffering. Legally what the doctor did was criminal but it helped to raise people awareness on the issue. But what does all this mean? What I have found is that this is simple question with a lot of complicated answers. There are many factors and circumstances that have to be weighed and considered before the op tion of euthanasia can brought to the table. Who has the final say mother, husband, child, is there any chance of recovery with medical advancement, should insurance coverage play a part? Who should be the judge of it being moral or not? These are just a few of the underlined issues that were explored. This is a subject that has no easy decisions or clear-cut choices but I believe strongly that euthanasia should be accepted and used as a way to come to a peaceful ending to life. Morals cannot play a role in this subject due to the different opinions of every individual. With government regulation and oversight there is a greater good that can be achieved. We can relieve pain and suffering, at the same time save financial resources. Euthanasia may not be the best choice for every patient but it should always be a n option for the terminally ill.

Works Cited
Betzold, Michael. Appointment with Doctor Death Troy, Mich., U.S.A. Momentum Books, c1993. Cangialosi, Jason . An Overview of the Debate Over Euthanasia and the Right to Die Nov. 9, 2005 http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/13163/an_overview_of_t he_debate_over_euthanasia.html?cat=5 Crumely/Paris, Bruce. Making a Case for Euthanasia. Mar 15, 2008. http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1722728,00.ht ml Davis, Stephanie "Euthanasia: a gift for suffering animals, owners." DVM: The Newsmagazine of Veterinary Medicine 34.7 (2003): 36. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 7 Dec. 2009. Larue, Gerald A. Euthanasia and Religion: a survey of the attitudes of world religions to the right-to- die Los Angeles : Hemlock Society, 1985 Leone, Daniel A. The ethics of euthanasia. San Diego, Calif. : Greenhaven Press, c1999. McDermott, Daniel "A Retributivist Argument against Capital Punishment.

" Journal of Social Philosophy 32.3 (2001): 317-333. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 6 Dec. 2009. Rigali, Justin, and William Lori "In Defense of Human Dignity." America 199.11 (2008): 27-28. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 2 Dec. 2009. Stanford Encyclopedia of philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/euthanasia-voluntary/#AMo White, James E. Contemporary moral problems 8th ed. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth, c2006.

Euthanasia: Whose decision is it? Denise Forbes Eng. 120: Principles of Effective Writing II Prof. G. Cianci December 7, 2009

Table of Contents

Introduction1

Results....1 -6

Discussion of Results.7

Conclusion.7

Works Cited...8