How does Mary Warnock persuade the readers to accept her viewpoint Essay Example

provides a brief description of Diane Pretty's case, highlighting that she was a mother of two suffering from motor neurone disease.

When the topic of being a mother of two is mentioned, it elicits strong emotions and profound sentiments from readers who contemplate the imminent loss of a mother to her children. Warnock recognizes that a high court judge thankfully ruled in Pretty's favor at the beginning of the legal proceedings, thereby indicating her agreement with the judge's decision. Furthermore, Warnock argues that Pretty's husband should be allowed to aid her in ending her life. By utilizing the term 'Terminate', she draws a comparison between abortion and euthanasia. There is widespread belief that abortion is morally acceptable in instances of fetal malformation.

The author establishes a logical progression in her argument by comparing abortion to euthanasia, suggesting that if one is morally acceptable, then the other must also be justified. This subtly persuades readers to align with her viewpoint. Additionally, the religious perspective presents a counterargument to Diane Pretty's case, asserting that life is sacred and under God's control.

The text discusses the beliefs of terminally ill and religious individuals who think that their suffering in the world is a purposeful fate. The text also explores the perspective of disabled people on topics like abortion and euthanasia, using their ability to voice opinions as a determining factor. According to the text, severely disabled individuals may not have the right to express such opinions. The author, Warnock, employs dramatic language such as "condemned," "distressing," and "painful" to create an emotional impact on the readers. The text is concluded with a rhetorical question aimed at engaging the readers.

According to the

third counter-argument, life is given by God and it is His choice to grant or take it away. Warnock uses an analogy to create a relatable connection. If I give you a gift, you have the freedom to do whatever you want with it; if you don't like it, you can get rid of it. In addition, Warnock involves the reader by asking rhetorical questions.

"Why should it be any different when it comes to the gifts from God?" These are her final remarks, followed by an assertion that if the argument does not originate from this belief, then it must arise from apprehension about potential misuse of euthanasia if legalized. This smoothly transitions into the following paragraph where Warnock presents her personal perspective and emphasizes the gravity of the situation using the term 'serious'. In addition to expressing her point of view, she also examines how the patient can be influenced by their families.

In her explanation, she states that while many families are loving, there are some who prioritize their own interests. She points out that these families may distort the patient's wishes in order to secure their share of the inheritance. Therefore, she believes the decision regarding euthanasia should be made by the patient. Furthermore, Warnock highlights the distinction between the argument and euthanasia. She employs five phrases to depict death, each one progressively more subtle. This approach generates empathy when she connects these descriptions to euthanasia, effectively persuading us that there is no difference between them and a desired death.

In addition to explaining that the decision regarding euthanasia should be made judiciously at the time the claim is presented, Warnock refers to a

previous case, the Tony Bland case, to support her argument. In this case, Tony Bland, who was in a situation similar to Pretty's and in need of assisted death, was granted approval for assisted suicide. However, Pretty is being denied this privilege.

Despite the outrage provoked by the decision in the Bland case, Warnock asserts that judges receive all the necessary information before reaching a verdict. In conclusion, Warnock argues that moral judgments should be left to judges rather than biased third parties, and this approach also spares families from having to make such difficult decisions. The reasons behind the judge's rejection of Diane Pretty's request for euthanasia and the court's ruling in favor of Tony Bland rather than Diane Pretty are still pondered: is it due to sexism or simply a reflection of changing times? While numerous individuals advocate for euthanasia rights, this particular case gained media attention because of Pretty and her husband's strong belief in it, compelling them to take their cause to the highest court.

If the courts had ruled in favor of Diane Pretty without any difficulty, it would have exposed the weakness of their system. They needed to resist in order to discourage individuals with terminal illnesses from assuming that obtaining the right to euthanasia is an effortless process.