Euthanasia Essay

While the free essays can give you inspiration for writing, they cannot be used 'as is' because they will not meet your assignment's requirements. If you are in a time crunch, then you need a custom written term paper on your subject (euthanasia)
Here you can hire an independent writer/researcher to custom write you an authentic essay to your specifications that will pass any plagiarism test (e.g. Turnitin). Waste no more time!

The Right to Choose

The main issues of euthanasia are maintaining the status of illegality, legalizing the procedure, and regulating the procedure. The controversy of euthanasia involves moral, ethical, and legal concerns. "In this country, according to a survey reported in the Journal of American Medical Association, nearly 63 percent of Americans favor legalizing physician-assisted suicide, yet most state statutes criminalize it (Stark, np)." People fear that if legalized, the choice to die will eventually be taken out of their hands and placed in the hands of people who will choose to kill select people based on their own private criteria. Maybe this is true, but it is doubtful. The issues are more realistic and involve our society's morals and the legal consequences of choice in dying.

Currently, the debate involving the practice of euthanasia revolves around moral and legal issues. The moral debate involves religion and other societal beliefs. Everyone has their own morals and values, which is their God-given, inalienable right. In America, our society's morals are based in part on religious beliefs. Most religions, especially Christian religions, feel that taking another's life is wrong and against God's commandments. The Catholic church feels strongly about euthanasia and encourages both the Catholic congregation and United States politicians to maintain the illegal status of euthanasia.

The legal debate is a hot issue with both proponents and opponents striving to win. In the United States, the Supreme Court decided to allow individual states to decide what to do about physician-assisted suicide. Currently, only Oregon allows physician-assisted suicide. Several other states are debating over the subject but without success. The main legal argument is whether or not a citizen of the United States has the constitutional right to choose between life and death. As it stands now, the Supreme Court ruled we do not have the constitutional right to choose.

One last issue is the financial effect on the person and their family. The surgeries, life support, drugs, doctor's fees and all the other expenses of a terminally ill patient are staggering. For one week in an intensive care unit, the cost could easily soar to $100,000. The cost of letting a person die is close to nothing when compared to the cost of keeping them alive.

A solution to the debate over euthanasia is highly anticipated. Maybe one day all the issues can be resolved and the bickering over mercy-killing will end. Of course, on the pessimistic side, the right to die debate might never be concluded. The controversy surrounding euthanasia can only be resolved when the procedure is legalized with mandatory, regulatory guidelines put in place to enable both physicians and individuals to decide the best course of action for themselves without fear.

Choice in Dying reminds us that "Although the concept of the right to die has interested philosophers since the time of the Greeks, it was not until recently that the issue became a pertinent and widespread social concern." A cancer patient named Robert Dent wrote the following in a letter before he died of an injection that he requested (Australian Man First in World, A5). "If I were to keep a pet animal in the same condition I am in, I would be prosecuted. If you disagree with voluntary euthanasia, then don't use it, but don't deny me the right to use it." He requested euthanasia and received it. The word euthanasia is a combination of the Greek prefix Eu, which means "good," and "thanatos," meaning "death. Webster's Dictionary defines it as "the act or practice of killing individuals that are hopelessly sick or injured for reasons of mercy. Euthanasia or "mercy killing" as they more commonly call it, is a highly debated topic that has many aspects. Financial, moral, social, and most important, legal concerns are raised whenever euthanasia is brought up.

There were two major cases in the U.S. that pertain to mercy killing that the Supreme court ruled on and one they refused to hear. According to Choice in Dying's Legal Developments web page, the following three legal rulings have recently been issued. In 1996, the Ninth Circuit Court in Compassion in Dying v. Washington and the Second Circuit Court in Quill v. Vacco, ruled that the U.S. Constitution protects the issue of physician-assisted suicide when requested by competent, terminally ill patients. The U.S. Supreme Court in January 1997 and June 1997 reversed these decisions based on the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment; but, they left it up to the states to ban or legalize physician-assisted suicide. In the third predominant case, "Lee v. Oregon (U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit; February 1997). The U.S. District Court had held that Oregon's Death with Dignity Act (Measure 16), the first law in the nation to legally authorize physician-assisted suicide, violated the Equal Protection Clause because the safeguards were insufficient to protect the rights of terminally ill patients who may seek assistance in dying. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 3-0 vote, found that the plaintiffs had no legal standing to challenge Measure 16 because they failed to show any threat of immediate harm and that their claim rested upon a 'chain of speculative contingencies.' The Court did not decide the constitutional merits of physician-assisted suicide. The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal (Choice in Dying, Legal Developments, np)."

As medical technology, financial concerns, and the age of people all increase, so will the demands for a legal decision on the euthanasia issue. Medical technology has advanced to a point that people can now be kept alive against their will. The people who support the right to die believe that medical technology has advanced so much that doctors can keep a person's body alive, even if the brain is not functioning. Medical advances and technologies have made it possible to survive pneumonia, heart attacks, and kidney failure. New drugs and surgeries have made living longer possible. And when people are in critical condition and about to die, artificial respirators and tube feeding will keep the body alive, even when the person might want and need to die. Medical technology will continue to advance and will necessitate alternatives to current medical practices and changes to medical and societal beliefs.

Various religions and society impose their beliefs and morals on the individual causing more confusion. In Euthanasia: The Battle for Life, Dr. Raymond Bohlin discusses what the Bible says about life, suffering, and death. He quotes scripture that reflects the Christian beliefs that God has created us, numbered our days, and that no one can take another's life because it breaks God's commandment. He goes on to imply that the issue can be resolved by praying, speaking out, and reaching out to the sick and the elderly. Just days before he died, Chicago Cardinal Bernardin had this to say to the court, " I am at the end of my earthly life. As one who is dying, I have especially come to appreciate the gift of life. For the court to accept assisted suicide would send a false signal that a less-than-perfect life is not worth living (Peres, News Section)." This stance is surprisingly different from surveys of Jewish willingness to participate in physician-assisted suicide. With a ratio of almost 3:1, Jewish respondents would participate in the procedure although it appears that the response is against Jewish teaching. However, it may not be against the teachings because the prime teachings are that each person is an individual and that 'loving kindness' should be extended to each person (Newfield, np. The two illustrated religious thoughts reflect our society's confusion over the issue of euthanasia. On one side are the people who want to legalize physician-assisted suicide because they believe that it is an individual's choice to decide to die with dignity. On the other side are the people who believe euthanasia should remain illegal because it is wrong to kill. Both religion and society have changed their established standards of beliefs in the past to encompass the beliefs of the people. They can do it again.

Another cause of the euthanasia debate is the financial concerns for both the family and society. As reported by The Villanova Center for Information Law and Policy, most people who are against euthanasia believe "it will only be a matter of time before courts will sanction putting people to death, not because they are desperately ill and want to die, but because they are deemed to pose an unjustifiable burden on society." P.J. King feels that the insurance industry in the future will offer patients the option to die instead of spending a lot of money on expensive treatments. This decision will be based on solely on cost containment. Not only do we have the insurance industry interested in the money saved through euthanasia, but we also have the heirs of the terminally ill who might be interested in the money they can receive it the patient chooses to die instead of suffer. Money and age, these are powerful change agents.

There are three primary solutions which could feasiblely be argued both for and against by the people and politicians most interested in the euthanasia debate. To properly evaluate the solutions, certain criteria must be chosen. Personal - Is the patient terminal and suffering and does he choose to die? Medical - Is it ethical, accepted practice and is the patient terminal/suffering? Religious - Is it moral and have the individuals involved considered their actions concerning their beliefs? Legal - Is it a crime to assist a terminally ill patient in dying?

One solution, legalization of euthanasia, would decriminalize the procedure and allow patients a true choice. At this time our citizens time, money, and resources are being ill-used in law suits and criminal cases to determine the legality of physician-assisted suicide. Barbara Dority, in The Humanist states "In order to grant the wishes of dying patients for help to end their suffering, we have to change the fact that doing so is against the law. How can we ask doctors- -in consultation with "families, clerics, and communities"- - to commit a serious crime for which they risk losing their licenses and possibly being arrested and going to jail? The legal issues must be confronted and a legal right to request physician aid in dying for the terminally ill secured." "Justice John Paul Stevens noted in his U.S. Supreme Court opinion that under certain circumstances, if state bans on assisted suicide were found to 'impose an intolerable intrusion on the patient's freedom,' they could be invalidated (Peres, News Section)."

The evaluation of legalization of euthanasia as a possible solution reflects that all criteria are minimally met. Euthanasia is a private matter between the terminal and suffering patient and the physician. The decision is made with physician and patient but there are no guidelines to protect against abuse. The moral issue is private and no longer relative because the action is not a crime; therefore, no one would be prosecuted.

The opponents of euthanasia feel that legalization would not be supported and if passed, there would be no guarantees of protection from abuse. "Opponents of euthanasia in...

"Australian Man First in World To Die With Legal Euthanasia." The New
York Times Sept 26 1996: A5. Proquest Direct.
Bohlin, Raymond. Probe Ministries. "Euthanasia: The Battle for Life". www.probe.org.
Choice in Dying. "Legal Developments". 1998. Web@ choices.org.
Choice in Dying. "Issues: Background on the right to die". 1998. Web@choices.org.
Daniel, Caroline. "Killing With Kindness". New Statesman. Aug. 15 1997: v126 n4347 p16.
Dority, Barbara. "The Ultimate Civil Liberty". The Humanist. Jul-Aug. 1997: v57 n4 p16.
King, P.J. Ohio Right to Life. "Forced Euthanasia?". April 1996. www.ohiolife.org.
Newfield, Philippa. The Institute for Jewish Medical Ethics of the Hebrew Academy of San Francisco. "Euthanasia, Physician Assisted Suicide and the Dying Patient: Medical Status". Webmaster.
Okie, Susan. "Country's Doctors Remain Divided Over Physician-Assisted Suicide". Washington Post, January 8, 1997. Sec A15
Peres, Judy. "Assisted-Suicide Bans Upheld". Chicago Tribune. June 27, 1997. Section News.
Smith, Wesley J. "Death Wars: As Euthanasia advocates press their case, the moral
health of the country is at stake". National Review. Jul 14, 1997: v49 n13 p36.
Stark, Albert. "Building a National Consensus on Assisted Suicide". The Trenton Times.
March 31, 1996. America Online.
The Villanova Center for Information Law and Policy, 96 C.D.O.S. 1507. "US 9
Compassion in Dying vs. State of Washington". America Online.
Voluntary Euthanasia Society. "Voluntary Euthanasia - The Basics". America Online.
1994 Health ResponseAbility Systems. America Online.
1997 Christian Medical Fellowship. "12 reasons why voluntary euthanasia should not be legalized". Webmaster@Cmf.org.uk.
Annotated Bibliography
"Australian Man First in World To Die With Legal Euthanasia." The New
York Times Sept 26 1996: A5. Proquest Direct. This article describes the actual
procedure used when Australia's new law was first used to aid the dying.
Bohlin, Raymond. Probe Ministries. "Euthanasia: The Battle for Life". www.probe.org. This
online article, written from the viewpoint of a Christian organization talks about what
the Bible says in relationship to living and dying. It also points out the supposed fallacy
of the laws in Holland
Choice in Dying. "Legal Developments". 1998. Web@ choices.org. This is a very good
eight page online article about the legal battles currently being fought in different
states.
Choice in Dying. "Issues: Background on the right to die". 1998. Web@choices.org. This
six page online article from a major organization involved in the euthanasia issue
provides background on the right to die. It discusses the different types of euthanasia,
the medical futility, and the facts about end-of-life care.
Daniel, Caroline. "Killing With Kindness". New Statesman. Aug. 15 1997: v126 n4347
p16. This cover story shows that people's sentiments are changing in the United
Kingdom about euthanasia. Many organizations are requesting the government to
legalize the procedure.
Dority, Barbara. "The Ultimate Civil Liberty". The Humanist. Jul-Aug. 1997: v57 n4 p16.
Ms. Dority, active in the right-to-die movement discusses the moral issues involved
with physician-assisted suicide. She knows there will be many complications with
legalization.
King, P.J. Ohio Right to Life. "Forced Euthanasia?". April 1996. www.ohiolife.org. This
is a good three page online article about the insurance insurance industry's impact on
euthanasia.
Newfield, Philippa. The Institute for Jewish Medical Ethics of the Hebrew Academy of San Francisco. "Euthanasia, Physician Assisted Suicide and the Dying Patient: Medical Status". Webmaster. This eight page article provides an overview of euthanasia and discusses the religious, medical, and legal aspects of legalization.
Okie, Susan. "Country's Doctors Remain Divided Over Physician-Assisted Suicide". Washington Post, January 8, 1997. Sec A15. Ms. Okie discusses the Supreme Court
rulings and the effects as seen primarily from the opponents to euthanasia viewpoint.
Peres, Judy. "Assisted-Suicide Bans Upheld". Chicago Tribune. June 27, 1997. Section News. Ms. Peres provides comments on the Supreme Court rulings with discussion based on each of the justices opinions.
Smith, Wesley J. "Death Wars: As Euthanasia advocates press their case, the moral
health of the country is at stake". National Review. Jul 14, 1997: v49 n13 p36. The
prominent nature of the debate is due to court cases. Public opinion favors legalization.
Stark, Albert. "Building a National Consensus on Assisted Suicide". The Trenton Times.
March 31, 1996. America Online. This Special to The Times article provides
background on the euthanasia legal issues in the past and the current legal status.
The Villanova Center for Information Law and Policy, 96 C.D.O.S. 1507. "US 9
Compassion in Dying vs. State of Washington". America Online. This 84 page online
article fully discusses the Supreme Court case, the background, the plaintiffs'
viewpoints, and the opinions of each of the justices. This was very interesting reading.
Voluntary Euthanasia Society. "Voluntary Euthanasia - The Basics". America Online. This
two page online article from a major international organization involved in the right to
die issues provides information on the organization and it's plans to change the United
Kingdom's suicide laws.
1994 Health ResponseAbility Systems. America Online. This two page online article
discusses Oregon's new law also known as the Death With Dignity Act.
1997 Christian Medical Fellowship. "12 reasons why voluntary euthanasia should not be legalized". Webmaster@Cmf.org.uk. This religious organization believes that legalization should be avoided because the risk to society and patient autonomy is too great. You should cite this paper as follows:

MLA Style
. EssayMania.com. Retrieved on 25 May, 2012 from
    <http://essaymania.com/66048/euthanasia>

More College Papers

Euthanasia essay
Euthanasia should be legal in the United States. Euthanasia is the practice of painlessly putting to death people who have incurable, painful, or distressing diseases or handicaps. Although most religious groups believe that it is suicide or murder and immoral, people should still have the right to

Euthanasia essay
I. Beginning A. “ Whose life is it, anyway?” These were the words of the late Sue Rodrigues, a high-profile, terminally-ill resident of British Columbia, Canada, who suffered from ALS (Lou Gehrig’s Disease). She was helped to commit suicide by a physician in violation of Canadian Law. B. Mo

Euthanasia essay
Euthanasia in the United States Every year two million people die in North America. Chronic illness, such as cancer or heart disease, accounts for two of every three deaths. It is estimated that approximately seventy percent of these people die after a decision is made to forgo life-sustaining treat