euthanasia

I definitely think terminally ill patients should be allowed to choose how and when they die. Just like it was said on rsrevision.com, "Most people would have their pets put down if they were suffering – this would be regarded as kindness. Why can’t the same kindness be given to humans?". I just think if the patient knows they are going to die and there is no possible way at all or any medicine that can save them then they should definitely be allowed to put an end to their suffering. Just like organ harvesting it's your body your choice no one else should be able to tell you otherwise especially if you're going to die no matter what. Also as said on rsrevision.com "Death is a private matter, and if you are not hurting anyone else, the state should not interfere". That's a very good point because euthanasia is not hurting anyone at all. Actually if anything it's just helping to make the terminally ill patient dies happy and not suffering.

There were many points about this on BBC.co.uk about this. It stated "Euthanasia may be necessary for the fair distribution of health resources". Basically saying that if euthanasia is allowed there could be more medical supplies available for other patients who need it. Another question that site asks is "is death a bad thing?". This is a very good question. I don't see why it is, death is part of the inevitable cycle of all life forms so why would this be any different from that? It wouldn't be. Especially if the person is terminally ill and has no possible way of recovery or of being saved. All life is just a cycle and eventually we are going to die anyway we cannot change that so if something happens to cut that cycle short why can't we have the right to have control of our own lives and choose to end the cycle the way we want and feel comfortable with.

Cody, you made some very good points and I agree with your position. Along with what you stated about it being "your body, your choice", in several Supreme Court cases, plaintiffs have argued that the right to die is protected by the same constitutional safeguards that guarantee rights such as marriage, procreation, and the refusal or termination of life saving medical treatment (Kass, 2010). One thing to consider, that I myself need to consider, is the definition of terminally ill. Mentally or physically? Also, if mentally, is the patient competent to make the decision? And under what guidelines would competence be decided? This topic goes along with some views of the organ harvesting post last week; yes I think it should be legal, under these circumstances, with these regulations.


Kass, L. (2010). Procon.org. In Procon.org. Retrieved from [Only admins are allowed to see this link]

Cody I totally agree with your valid points on how we should be able to choose if we wish to die. When the point in people's life’s comes down to your going to die later, but not now they you should decide like you stated if you want to end your life now to make it easier on yourself. Like you said it would be worth it for you to die the way you want then dying later maybe not the way you in titled to die.

Though your points are really good, especially the ones about putting down your pets, I would have to disagree with you. I understand that nobody deserves to suffer but suicide is still suicide to me. I see where you were going when you talked about death being the cycle of life, but sense it is the cycle of life, should we just accept our fate and die naturally? Taking your own life, no matter what shape way or form just goes against the laws of nature. I was reading an article that made a really good about assisted suicide and what could be a reason towards doing it, other than being a pain. This reason being consists of "The last few months of a patient's life are often the most expensive in terms of medical care. Shortening this period through Euthanasia could be seen as a way of reliving the pressure on scarce medical resources, or family finances" (Anti-euthanasia arguments, 2012). I felt like this was a really good point because problem is the reason as to why the patient decided assisted-suicide. I mean it would be horrible for a person to end their life just to elevate the cost of medical bills on their families. Then that faces me to the problem if they mentally incapable, does that mean that the family will decide this because of the finical issues? Not everyone feels the same way about a family member as someone else, they may be a burden to that set family. Another point that I would like to bring up is a child. What if a child was terminally ill, do you think that they should have a choice to choose when they die? Are they even capable in the choice and if not, do you think that parents should chose the same fate for them as what would have been chosen when one thinks of an older person? Suicide is ending your life and to me it will always be suicide, so once again I am against this choice.

Resources

Unknown. Anti-euthanasia arguments. (2012). Retrieved 20 September, 2012, from BBC Ethics Guide: [Only admins are allowed to see this link]