Euthanasia Pros And Cons Essay Example for Free

Euthanasia Pros And Cons Essay Introduction Health becomes everyone concerns since it influence our today’s activities. People who get sick will likely not feel up to do any activities and therefore reduce their effectiveness. This is the underlying reason why we witness growing number of nutrition supplement in recent days. The aims of such growth are to give our bodies additional synthetic foods to replace the natural ones that we should take but do not have time for it. Since cure takes lots of money and time, today people understand the need to take preventive instead of curative actions. However, at some cases, there are patients who cannot stand having a great suffer and they decide to end their life by medical practice called euthanasia. Euthanasia exists as one of medical approaches, which is commonly conducted in some countries. It is not supported by decree but some rules agree to a standard defense from general practitioners that have remained to official principles. This depends on charitableness of the demand and relievable-ness of the pain. Considering than euthanasia is debatable from the point of ethical view, therefore, the research statement of this paper is â€Å"amidst the endless debates over the practice of euthanasia, what are ethical arguments that both support and cons it.† Concerning the ethical issues, this paper will elaborate three ethical argument of euthanasia. Three Arguments of Euthanasia 2.1  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Background of Euthanasia Euthanasia is the process or practice to end the life of a person who suffers from a severe disease by committing an unusual medical treatment. The objective of euthanasia is to end the pain of a person who has a terminal disease or devastating illness. Many people consider it as a medically accepted murder since, at some places; a general practitioner may legally decide not to extend the patient’s life. Many organizations oppose the practice of euthanasia by encouraging the use of advance medical technology, which has been used to lengthen the lives of patients who are continuing great suffering (â€Å"Euthanasia†). Technological progresses in medication have enabled to lengthen life in patients with no optimism of revival. The negative consideration of euthanasia has occurred because of the practice of using extraordinary means to save life. Under such circumstances, the positive consideration of performing euthanasia has come to mention acts that aggressively cause death. In practice, Euthanasia uses some methods such as antibiotics, drugs, or surgery in large quantity but eventually lethal pain medication is supplied. Euthanasia is an ordinary practice among U.S. hospitals and general practitioners (â€Å"Euthanasia and End-of-Life Decisions†). There are, in general, two methods of euthanasia: active or passive. Active euthanasia refers to the practice where a general practitioner simply put to death a person who suffers from terminal conditions. Meanwhile, passive euthanasia brings up any action of letting the patient to die, which may comprise failing to give needed medicine. Both of active and passive euthanasia can be voluntary, non-voluntary, or involuntary (â€Å"Euthanasia†). Ethical View of Euthanasia Oxford Advanced Learner’ Dictionary defines ethic as a system of moral principles and rule of conduct[1]. In the case of euthanasia, moral principle might apply not only for the patient but also for the medical industry in general. Concerning the ethical view, Gillon (1994) explains there are four ethical principles that are related to health care: respect autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, and promote justice. In the case of euthanasia, we will discuss the role of three principles; they are respect autonomy, non-maleficence, and promote justice. 2.2.1  Ã‚  Ã‚   Respect Autonomy In the respect autonomy, the principle underlines the important to educate, communicate, respect, and empower. We found that autonomy becomes sensitive issues in the practice of euthanasia since it is both important and controversial since there is controversy between the medical ethics to strive for making people staying alive and the intention of family or individual to end someone’s life due to severe diseases that someone attains (Gillon, 1994). The importance of euthanasia has been found to play significant role in today’s health care industry although it generates a conflict between rights of individual and the family. In addition, people who support euthanasia have capitalized on people that confuse, and fear about the use of modern life-lengthening technologies. Being capable of deciding the time and manner of person’s death regardless the destiny is showed as the definitive freedom. On the other hand, a choice to take person’s life or to let a doctor to take life a suffering patient is very dissimilar from a choice to refuse extraordinary oppressive cure (â€Å"Euthanasia and Physician Assisted Suicide†).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Furthermore, people must be cautious of those who force to end the lives of the elderly people and the severe patients. If people ever make a decision that break quality of life, they should provide good reasons for ending the life. There is dissimilarity between permitting nature to take its path and aggressively helping death. The term of euthanasia becomes famous in society since it is a kind of â€Å"death with self-respect† or helping suicide (â€Å"Euthanasia and Physician Assisted Suicide†). Non- maleficence In the non-maleficence, the ethical view is to do no avoidable harm both to individuals and to groups (Gillon, 1994). In line with this view, the euthanasia may be seen as unethical practice since medically, any patients still have opportunity to heal and medical technology may help to lengthen life of patients with severe diseases. They also start to speculate whether they have the rights to get for themselves or their fellowmen an easy death, which will curtail suffering and appear to them more in agreement with human self-respect (â€Å"Declaration on Euthanasia†). Many people argue in the some states in answering the question of what comprises aggressively causing death and what comprises only permitting death to happen obviously. In a more extensive meaning, both shortest killing and â€Å"letting a patient to pass away,† where the movements required saving a life are not simply to be taken (â€Å"Euthanasia and End-of-Life Decisions†). Legalizing euthanasia would also contravene some public confidences about human rights and equal opportunity. Some of them declare human absolute rights to stay life, to have autonomy and the happiness. If people’s rights to stay alive are reduced in value, the other rights will have no sense. Peoples, who stand for the attentions of elderly and disable people, and those who suffer AIDS or other incurable sicknesses, by current medical technology, are reasonably feared of having judged to be killed by euthanasia method (â€Å"Euthanasia and End-of-Life Decisions†). Promote Justice. The third ethical view is the promote justice. It simply explains fair distribution of resources, respect for rights and respect for morally acceptable laws. One problem in euthanasia case is that it â€Å"is not fair.† We (the elderly or patients with severe diseases) are not â€Å"created equal†. Under such circumstances, the doctor has to try to create a level playing field, in the interests of justice (Gillon, 1994).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Concerning the promote of justice, some states in the U.S face constituent vote schemes and â€Å"legislation statements† trying to legalize euthanasia and help suicide. Public judgment concerning this subject has become more significant because extensive maintain could extremely well smooth the progress of the legalization of these policies in other states (â€Å"Declaration on Euthanasia†). A recent survey reveals that almost all of Americans support the practice of euthanasia. However, advanced research has illustrated that there are important disparities in levels of support for euthanasia across different social groups. Lately, these approaches have been accepting more awareness since they can control the legislation and recognize how to be concerned about the patients in the future (â€Å"Euthanasia suicide mercy-killing right-to-die physician assisted†). The regulation distinguishes that euthanasia is a practice that had been tolerated for many years in which it allows the practice of euthanasia and medical doctors who help to end someone life under some conditions. The conditions are the patient’s suffering is intolerable with no hope of recovery, the patients who ask for euthanasia must be voluntary and persevere over time, and the patient must be completely conscious of his/her situation, hopes and choices. Conclusion Euthanasia is the process or practice to end the life of a person who suffers from a severe disease by committing an unusual medical treatment. The objective of euthanasia is to end the pain of a person who has a terminal disease or devastating illness. Many people consider it as a medically accepted murder since, at some places; a general practitioner may legally decide not to extend the patient’s life. The practice of euthanasia is still debatable from the point of ethical view. This paper reveals three ethical view of its practice based on Gillon (1994), the three ethical views that we discuss in this paper are respect autonomy, non-maleficence, and promote justice. Works Cited â€Å"Euthanasia suicide mercy-killing right-to-die physician assisted.† 2005. Retrieved October 15, 2006 from http://www.euthanasia.com â€Å"Euthanasia and Physician Assisted Suicide.† 2004. Retrieved October 15, 2006 from http://www.religioustolerance.org/euthanas.htm â€Å"Euthanasia.† 2005. Retrieved October 15, 2006 http://ethics.acusd.edu/euthanasia.html â€Å"Euthanasia and End-of-Life Decisions.† 2004. Retrieved October 15, 2006 fromhttp://ethics.acusd.edu/Applied/Euthanasia/ â€Å"Euthanasia.† 2005. Retrieved October 15, 2006 from http://www.nrlc.org/euthanasia/index.html â€Å"Declaration on Euthanasia.† 1980. Retrieved October 15, 2006 from http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19800505_euthanasia_en.html Gillon R. Medical ethics: four principles plus attention to scope. BMJ 1994; 309: 184-188 Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (4th ed.).(1989). [1] Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (4th ed.).(1989).