Summary Voluntary euthanasia is unnecessary because alternative treatments exist It is widely believed that there are only two options open to patients with terminal illness:
Share via Email Multiple sclerosis sufferer Debbie Purdy pictured here with her husband, Omar Puente has taken her legal battle to clarify the law on assisted suicide to the court of appeal.
Further, the law should not criminalise people who accompany those who make rational decisions to end their suffering The motion will seek to take the issue forward in a compassionate and fair way that I believe will serve the interests of the terminally ill and our society.
The starting point has to be in the law, which at present is failing, as shown by the recurrence of cases in the courts that often place relatives, already dealing with the painful loss of a loved-one, in the middle of distressing legal battles.
There is clearly a desire — whether we like it or not — among a number of patients at the end of often terrible battles with debilitating, incurable diseases to end their suffering with the support of their relatives. To deny this right is to prolong the suffering for individuals and families, something that I can simply not condone.
I do accept though that this is not like any other clinical decision — and that if society is to offer this solemn choice it must also build in safeguards to its laws that not only rectify the inadequacies of the current situation, but also protect the vulnerable, the weak and all those — doctors and nurses included — who are involved in this incredibly difficult situation.
As a start we must enact legislation to decriminalise acts of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. Some of the reasons that are compelling enough for us to change our laws are: Prevention of cruelty and protection of human rights To allow a terminally ill individual to end their life is the only humane, rational and compassionate choice.
The right to life and the right to private and family life under the European convention on human rights should be interpreted broadly to include decisions about quality of life, including decisions about death if the life is no longer one of quality. Regulatory Control The terminally ill are travelling abroad to countries where the right to end of life in terminal cases is recognised and is lawful.
We cannot regulate the laws of foreign lands. We must make provisions within our laws to regulate this issue within our boundaries under our control and supervision.
We must not prosecute loved ones for "encouraging or assisting" suicide who enable or assist a terminally ill individual to travel abroad to end his or her life lawfully. Ambiguity in the application of the current law The current law conflicts with the law as it is being enforced.
Twelve Reasons Why Euthanasia Should Not be Legalised. Euthanasia is a practice used by doctors in the most extreme circumstances, for patients they feel they can no longer help; this practice should be legalized in America because people should have the right to decide whether or not they live or die. Should euthanasia be legalized essay Zula 22/04/ More than that legalizing active euthanasia and should euthanasia should be allowed to relieve pain and islamic perspectives. Assisted suicide lead to view essay paper examples. V. To play the .
If the laws as written were being enforced, over a hundred people would have been prosecuted for accompanying their loved ones abroad to help them end their lives.
This ambiguity and uncertainty leaves all concerned, including physicians, unprotected. Discriminatory effect of the laws The ability of the wealthy to travel to countries where it is lawful for the terminally ill to end their lives has the discriminatory impact of treating the haves and have-nots unequally.
The Safeguards Many people are opposed to legislation that would allow "end of life" choices. But our concerns relating to abuses and protection of the vulnerable can be addressed by ensuring that certain objective safeguard conditions are met prior to allowing a terminally ill individual from exercising his or her right to die with dignity.
Some of the safeguards include the following: In conclusion, the only humane choice is to allow individuals who are suffering to choose to end their suffering. Further, the discrepancies in the laws as they exist and how they are being enforced have led to uncertainty.
If we do not address these issues openly and head-on, we will have continued uncertainty and unregulated practice of euthanasia or assisted suicide with the fear of prosecution hanging over the heads of all concerned.Essay Euthanasia Should Not Be Legalized in America.
Euthanasia refers to the intentional bringing about of the death of a patient, either by killing him/her, or by letting him/her die, for the patient's sake to prevent further pain or suffering from a terminal illness.
Euthanasia Should Not Be Legalized in America Essay Euthanasia refers to the intentional bringing about of the death of a patient, either by killing him/her, or by letting him/her die, for the patient's sake to prevent further pain . However, one of the more common rationales for why euthanasia should not be legalized has to do with the idea that a terminally ill individual might not be in their right state of mind to make a.
Euthanasia should not be implemented or legalized Kilner, Miller, & Pellegrino, () stated that “euthanasia can be categorized as active euthanasia which involves willfully taking positive steps to terminate life, passive euthanasia entails deciding not to take the positive steps to prolong life.
Why Euthanasia Should Not Be Legalized Introduction Legalizing euthanasia means giving people a right to choose death when they are faced by a hard situation that makes them hopeless. Euthanasia Should Not Be Legalized in America Essay Euthanasia refers to the intentional bringing about of the death of a patient, either by killing him/her, or by letting him/her die, for the patient's sake to prevent further pain or suffering from a terminal illness.