Research Paper: Euthanasia Debate

\"The right of a competent, terminally ill person to avoid excruciating pain and embrace a timely and dignified death bears the sanction of history and is implicit in the concept of ordered liberty. The exercise of this right is as central to personal autonomy and bodily integrity as rights safeguarded by this Court's decisions relating to marriage, family relationships, procreation, contraception, child rearing and the refusal or termination of life-saving medical treatment. In particular, this Court's recent decisions concerning the right to refuse medical treatment and the right to abortion instruct that a mentally competent, terminally ill person has a protected liberty interest in choosing to end intolerable suffering by bringing about his or her own death.\"

The author of this article claims that there are really no facts to euthanasia but rather opinions. The author states to two sides, whether for or opposed, and the possible negatives that will come along with legalizing euthanasia.

This article provides summaries on the views of different religious leaders, scholars and ethicists from 16 major American religious groups explain how their faith traditions' teachings address physician-assisted suicide, euthanasia and other end-of-life questions.

\"The church also teaches that it is justified to stop medical treatment, including artificial nutrition and hydration, when that treatment brings significantly more burdens than benefits to a person.\"

The Murder Act of 1965 and the Suicide Act of 1971.

It is the claim that if an important distinction is not made or an action taken, what seems like a relatively small problem will become much more serious. What's next? Compulsory euthanasia.

\" Femke, for example, is fictional - a hypothetical case presented to 1769 Belgian teenagers aged around 14 at 20 secondary schools in Flanders. Of these, 61 per cent said Femke should be offered euthanasia, compared with only 18 per cent for Nathalie, a girl with severe but not life-threatening burns (Child: Care, Health and Development, doi.org/dwf326).

This article basically talks about the different forms and treatments for euthanasia. Injections is a very popular, painless and common practice. Gases and plastic pills also known as the peaceful pill allows the patient to unknowingly feel the pain while dying faster.

The image I chose showed different ethnic groups and whether they agreed to wanting to start or stop life support for the terminally ill. Filipino, Africans, Koreans, Iranians, and Mexicans said that they would want to start life support. Whites, Chinese, and Jews said that they would want to end life support.

Dr. Anne Turner suffered from an the incurable brain disease progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP). Was a British doctor so she knew what would eventually happen to her. She and her family flew to Switzerland to terminate her own life.

In \"Of Mice of Men\", Lennie's death was not technically euthanasia because he did not mind living, but it was a set agreement between him and George for him to kill him. George knew that he had to kill Lennie because if he didn't shoot him now, Lennie would suffer in prison or die a slow and painful death. His death relates to the euthanasia of the old dog in the story.

Voluntary euthanasia is when the patient is asks to be euthanized and it is performed by a doctor. Passive euthanasia is when the patient refuses medical treatment in order to speed up their death. Physician assisted euthanasia is when the patient ask for a lethal dose of something to be injected into them selves by themselves.

This article talks about the possibility of euthanasia becoming legal in Belgium as well as the case of a young man wishing to be euthanized. \"Cases like Verkroost's lie at the heart of an ongoing debate in the Netherlands about how to define the right to die. Some campaigners believe the country is still too conservative and want to expand euthanasia laws to include the mentally ill and children. Others fear that that is going too far and that the current system already makes the choice to die too easy.\"

The earliest known documentation against euthanasia in America was in 1828 in New York. A law was enacted making euthanasia illegal. Afterwards many other states followed New York's example.

The definition of euthanasia is \"the act or practice of killing or permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured individuals ... in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy.\" The world comes from the Greek meaning \"good death\". In the time of the Greek euthanasia was just a way to die, that was morally acceptable, if you felt you were no longer useful. Today it is a means of dying with dignity and to end suffering.

Professor Margaret Somerville explains this difference in perspective in The Ethical Canary: If we regard our bodies primarily as instruments for pleasure or for taking control, and if we value ourselves (or other people) only for what we (or they) do, not simply because we (or they) exist, euthanasia is arguably a rational response when we (or they) become weak and no longer experience pleasure or are of use.... If we see ourselves (and others) as having worth and dignity just because we (and they) exist, euthanasia is not acceptable because it contravenes this intrinsic worth and dignity.

\"There is a difference between live and be alive.\" Being alive is only a biological phenomenon. Animals and even plants are \"alive.\" But living means much more. Living involves both biological and biographical aspects when sufferings darken the joy of a being to live a human life; he is entitled to the same compassion on the part of the society, which it never declines to an animal.''

Euthanasia is such a popular debate now because people are living longer. In early times there were not many medical advances to keep people alive. With all the technology we have now people want the choice to live as long as they like.

With the Death with Dignity Act in Oregon there are many steps to help ensure there will be no abuses of the law. The following is the procedure for completing euthanasia in Oregon: The patient must make two oral requests to his or her physician, separated by at least fifteen days. The patient must provide a written request to his or her physician witnessed by two individuals who are not family members or primary caregivers. A patient may rescind his or her request at any time. The diagnosis and prognosis must be confirmed by the prescribing physician and a consulting physician. The prescribing physician and a consulting physician must concur that the patient is capable (defined as able to make and communicate health care decisions). If either physician determines that the patient's judgment is impaired, the patient must be referred for a psychological examination. The prescribing physician must inform the patient of alternatives, including palliative care, hospice, and pain management options.

\"However, euthanasia must be distinguished from the stopping of extraordinary means of health care. The patient -- or guardian in the case of an unconscious patient -- has the right to reject outright or to discontinue those procedures which are extraordinary, do not offer a proportionate good, do not offer reasonable hope of benefit or are simply \"heroic.\" Such a decision is most appropriate when death is clearly imminent. In these cases, the person would place himself in God's hands and prepare to leave this life, while maintaining ordinary means of health care.\"