Euthanasia should be stop or not?
The main goals of this paper are to talk about euthanasia and to answer on the question that is was used for the title of the paper. Dual nature of the notion euthanasia is very good described in the question: Euthanasia should be stop or not? Describing the structure of the paper I want to mention that first of all we should define the term “euthanasia”ť and then look at its historical background. The next part of the work will be about debates around euthanasia and it will reflect pros and cons of this act. The last part of the work will show my unique opinion about the euthanasia and I also want to explain why I think so.
Concept “euthanasia”ť means a painless and light death in translation from Greek. It was presented in the XVI century by the F.Bacon and from those times it came in use as real scientific conception. The way of this term and the process was full of hardships; because its use in our speech doesn’t mean its legalization and many people suffer in their struggle for and against euthanasia. There are many definitions of this term in our literature and I would like to present one of them in this paper. Defining the term “euthanasia”ť it is necessary to use quotations made by Beauchamp & Davidson who said that “Euthanasia is the deliberate killing of a person for the benefit of that person.
In most cases euthanasia is carried out because the person who dies asks for it, but there are cases called euthanasia where a person can’t make such a request.”ť (Beauchamp & Davidson, 1979)
Euthanasia has debate character and there are as many opinions about this topic as there are many people who are interested in it. Every argument “for”ť will find an argument “against”ť and that’s why debate around this topic have a place for many years.
Every adult has full discretion to dispose of their own lives. Including the stop, break it. So why is it bad to help person to make this latest act as painlessly as possible and humanely? Here, the main argument of supporters of euthanasia. But how is possible to reconcile euthanasia with Christian morality, which condemns suicide? And, most importantly, how is possible to avoid abuse? Opponents argue. Now in the USA and other countries, these arguments erupted with renewed force.
Supporters of euthanasia say about the choices that no one can make bad patients experiencing severe pain, that a vegetative existence and pain are deprived of human dignity, that the patients themselves, seeking to end of their suffering, often resorted to the more horrible way to commit suicide than a painless injection.
No less serious, and the arguments of those who do not consider euthanasia permissible. For example, in their opinion, it can not shoulder the responsibility on doctors for killing people. They draw attention to the fact that medicine is growing rapidly, and now are found ways of treating of diseases that not so long time ago were considered hopeless, thus disconnecting the patient from life support systems, we deny him a chance to wait for the drugs from his illness. It is also great the likelihood of abuse by relatives, paying for treatment of hopelessly ill (or wait for the inheritance, which, of course, will be the smaller, higher medical expenses of the owner of state). Greedy relatives may enter into an agreement with the medical staff and put pressure on the dying man to represent his death as a voluntary, whereas in fact consent to euthanasia will be extracted under pressure.
But the main and really unsolvable ethical problem arises with regard to patients who are unable to make their own decisions about how to stop living: being in a coma, mentally retarded, including suffering from senile dementia, and very young children. Their decision for them, if euthanasia will be legalized can be taken for someone else. Who it should be – doctors, relatives or representatives of the authorities? And what is the guarantee that their decision will be dictated by considerations of humanity and the interests of the patient? After all, had not yet erased from the historical memory of the Nazi program of “healing the nation” by mass destruction, weak-minded, mentally ill, disabled, homosexuals, “racially inferior”ť.
In my opinion euthanasia should have a place in our society, because nowadays many people suffer from awful diseases and they make suicides for one aim to put an end to these sufferings. It is understandable that euthanasia is also a kind of voluntary suicide, but in this case ill people have possibility to talk with their relatives and tell them truth why they can’t live any more. I think that euthanasia give people humanistic possibility to choose the way how and when to die. I also agree with the statement that our life was given to people by God, but in many cases people should decide what to do with their life during the life span.
It is necessary to mention that in principle, the life and death – it is purely personal aspects and it is a kind of secret stuff that should not be taken on public display. These characteristics give a grotesque character to the process of euthanasia. Discussing this topic connected with euthanasia I found that there are so many questions and there is so little amount of answers on them”¦
One more question forced me to think about legal side of euthanasia: is it necessary to help a person who decided to put an end to own life and is it legal to help a person who decided to choose such kind of voluntary suicide? Thinking about above presented question I come to the conclusion that it is really the main issue, and not just for lawyers. As far as I know from the press it is now discussing the possibility of investigative actions against people who helped people to find their death. The question always is, independently whether a man tired of life, decided on suicide, observed whether the principle of so-called “rule over the act”ť. If so, our legislation does not see any crime in this help. Doubts arise only when a helper to take actions that suicide is not in a position to direct and control. This is the same border, which does not want to be moved by legislators.
Summarizing all information presented in this paper it is necessary to say that euthanasia is an act when people asking for help to leave this world and it has dual character. I think that euthanasia is a possible help to the person who wants to die and it is also a moral help that show a person that he or she is not alone in this moment and someone is thinking about his/her life in this minute between life and death. The problem is in fact that doctors shouldn’t take active part in this process, because then it will be killing and doctors must be keepers of people’s lives and ethical norm of absolute inviolability of life. Higher achievement of our civilization is celled in a commandment: Â«Don’t killÂ».