Mr. Tang Siu Pun, who was nicknamed “Ah Pun”, was once a gymnast. Unfortunately, he had become paralyzed after the accident during his gymnastics display in 1991. After getting injured, he had once sent a letter to the Former Chief Executive, Tung Chee Hwa, asking for legalizing euthanasia. His act had successfully aroused Hong Kong people’s concern. Life, not only especially Tang’s, is tough for those suffering from terminally illness, but euthanasia is a way to save them from the living hell.
Death, for those who are against legalizing euthanasia, means the end of a life, and the total and permanent cessation of all vital functions of an organism (Dictionary.com, 2013). However, for us, who support euthanasia, have a different understanding. When life is suffering and pain, death is the solution and measure for a better life. There three major groups of people who ask for euthanasia, those who are asking for ending the pain that they have suffered, people ask for happiness and people ask for human rights.
Euthanasia, which is also called mercy or assisted killing, is a measure for patients to stop the suffering. Cancer patients and other patients who unfortunately get long-term diseases, or like Tang, becoming paralyzed, have to take many different surgery and therapies, for example chemotherapy, radiotherapy and electrotherapy. From all the medical personnel, we know that cancer or other diseases could possibly be cured. However, at the same time there are lots of side effects. They may lose their hair, or get skinner and skinner. No matter how much they want to eat, they just cannot eat as much as they wish. Most importantly, they still have to suffer pain during the treatments. The ooutsiders could never feel the pain they suffered. No one knows how they feel throughout the process. Maybe they want to stop them. Maybe they want to give up. Or, maybe they want to suicide.
Suffering the physical pain during different...
The Right to Die
In today’s society, the rapid and dramatic development of medicine and technology has allowed us to save more lives than was ever possible in the past. Medicine enabled us the means to cure or to reduce the suffering of people afflicted with diseases that were once fatal or painful. At the same time, however, medical technology has given us the power to sustain the lives (or, some would say, prolong the deaths) of patients whose physical and mental capabilities cannot be restored, whose degenerating conditions cannot be reversed, and whose pain cannot be eliminated. As medicine struggles to pull more and more people away from the edge of death, the plea that tortured, deteriorated lives be mercifully ended grows louder and more frequent. Euthanasia has become a provocative subject because of its past, present and future status among todays families.
Euthanasia is a controversial topic, not only because there are many moral delemmas associated with it, also in what it constitutes its definition. At the extreme ends of disagreement, some schools of thoughts aid in dying, is a merciful act of dying and at the other end, there are opponent of euthanasia who believe that this method is a form of murder. The term euthanasia is derived from the Greek word ‘eu’ meaning “good” and ‘thanatos’ means death.
"In ancient Greece and Rome, before the coming of Christianity, attitudes toward infanticide, active...
...PRO (yes) CON (no)
The American Civil Liberties Union stated in its 1996 amicus brief in Vacco v. Quill that:
"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.
A state's categorical ban on physician assistance to suicide -- as applied to competent, terminally ill patients who wish to avoid unendurable pain and hasten inevitable death -- substantially interferes with this protected liberty interest and cannot be sustained."
1996 - The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
Margaret P. Battin, PhD, Distinguished Professor of Philosophy and Adjunct Professor of Internal Medicine at the University of Utah,...
...The Right to Die Modern medical technology has made it possible to extend the lives of many far beyond when they would have died in the past. Death, in modern times, often ensures a long and painful fall where one loses control both physically and emotionally. Some individuals embrace the time that modern technology buys them; while others find the loss of control overwhelming and frightening. They want their loved ones to remember them as they were not as they have become. Some even elect death to avoid burdens of lingering on. They also seek assistance in doing so from medicine. The demands for assisted suicide and euthanasia are increasing (Kass 17). These issues raise many questions, legal and ethical. Although neither assisted suicide and euthanasia are legal, many people believe they should be. A great number of those people may never be faced with the decision, but knowing the option would be there is a comfort (Jaret 46). For those who will encounter the situation of loved ones on medication, being treated by physicians, sometimes relying on technical means to stay alive arises a great moral conflict. I wish to explore this topic on ethical, not legal issues. Do people have a right to choose death? More in particular, are euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide morally legitimate? Euthanasia involves a death that is intended to benefit the person who dies, and requires a final act by some other person, for example, a...
...The Right To Die
Imagine that you have come down with a disease and you have just been told that there is no cure. There in your hospital bed all you can think about is the pain and the agony you are going to have to endure for the rest of your remaining life. I for one know that I do not want to spend my last times on this earth in pain and discomfort, knowing that I will never walk again, or feed myself, or maybe ever even come back to consciousness. For years, doctors have been prohibited from helping patients to take their own lives. I believe that a terminally ill patient should have the right to decide if they have had enough. By legalizing euthanasia, also referred to as physician assisted suicide, tremendous pain and suffering of patients can be saved. The right to die should be a fundamental freedom to each person. Patients should have to right to die with their dignity intact rather than have their illness leave them as merely a shell of their former selves. These are just a few of the reasons as to why every individual should have the right to die if they are terminally ill.
Numerous ailments such as certain types of cancer result in a slow, agonizing death. Doctors have enough knowledge and experience to know when a patient's days are numbered. What purpose would it serve to suffer endlessly until the body finally gives out?...
...The Right to Die
(BUSI - 3005 - 1)
Dr. Jerry Griffin
July 14, 2013
CLEAR STATEMENT OF ARGUMENT
The right to die should be legal. Being forced to live a life that is unbearable is a violation of that person’s right to live and die as they see fit. Many countries permit euthanasia and doctor-assisted suicide. Euthanasia “can quickly and humanly end a patient’s suffering allowing them to die with dignity” (rsrevision.com, 2011) The quality of life is the main issue surrounding the right to die. The cost to keep a terminally ill person alive is very expensive. This can be a burden on the family.
PREMISE OF ARGUMENT
People with terminal illnesses have unbearable pain and suffering. Large medical bills are accumulated when terminally ill patients go in-and-out of the hospital to try and ease their suffering. Thus, increasing economic affliction for the surviving family.
CONCLUSION SHOULD BE
Therefore, we should legalize the right to die for those suffering of terminal illness due to the cost, pain, and suffering.
THE RIGHT TO DIE: AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY
Blocher, Mark. The Right to Die? Caring Alternatives to Euthanasia. Chicago: Moody, 1999.
Though the "death with...
Right to Die
September 16, 2013
Right to Die
When an individual decides that he or she no long want to live because of death soon to be or a serious illness some states will allow the right to die. The right to die does not mean they will just give up on life and passed but is assisted in some way, which could be assistance from a doctor. Throughout this essay I will cover what the right to die means, what states allow and do not allow and what is used to assist in the right to die.
Have you ever just felt like you wanted to die? All because you were just too tired, you broke up with your significant other or you are just too stressed to continue. Individuals dying of cancer, or are terminally ill some are scared to die whereas others just wish it was over so they were not in any more pain. I have chosen the “Right to Die” topic. My reasoning for choosing this topic is for two reasons: First I have always found this topic to be fairly interesting, and know of it but not a lot. Second I am a person who is scared of death so I am hoping that it will give me a little more understanding as to why someone would want this for his or herself.
States that Allow Right to Die
...No Evidence of Vulnerable Groups’ Higher Risk Due To Right-To-Die Laws
There has been a huge debate over the last several years on whether or not assisted suicide or euthanasia should be made legal. Many proponents believe that each individual should have the right to die, if that is what they desire, and no law should be made to stop them from doing so. Opponents stand on morality as their basis in not allowing such laws and most believe that if legalized, vulnerable groups like the homeless or mentally disabled, will be put at more of a risk. However, research pointed out by Michael Smith, shows no evidence to support such claims.
No Evidence of Vulnerable Groups’ Higher Risk Due To Right-To-Die Laws
There has been a huge debate over the last several years on whether or not assisted suicide or euthanasia should be made legal. Many proponents believe that each individual should have the right to die, if that is what they desire, and no law should be made to stop them from doing so. Opponents stand on morality as their basis in not allowing such laws and most believe that if legalized, vulnerable groups like the homeless or mentally disabled, will be put at more of a risk. Michael Smith, correspondent for MedPage Today, an online news source that covers the medical field, points out that no evidence exists...
Ethical issue: The right to die
Too many people the topic of death is not easy to discuss. Many individuals do not want to imagine or even think about death or end of life, yet policy analyst and bioethicists struggle with this matter on a daily basis. Media coverage of the cases of Dr. Jack Kevorkian and Schiavo Terry also point to political and public fascination regarding the moral issues surrounding the dying.
With the advancement of technology, it is argued that nature is no longer defined for us. The advancement of technology and health care sector has made physicians able to prolong life of sick patients beyond the intentions of nature (Bluhm & Heineman, 150). This issue, however, has sparked a series of reactions regarding people right to die just like they are entitled to the right of life. Questions have also been raised concerning equitable access to the life-sustaining services in the healthcare system. The most crucial question threat need to be addressed according to me is whether the physicians are ethically allowed to execute their patients wish regarding the manner and time of their death. Is the patient autonomy limited? Can the line between killing and the right to die be drawn clearly?
There are many definitions towards the issue of euthanasia. Some individuals term it as mercy killing, which occurs when a terminally ill...