A question of rights... Does an individual who has no hope of recovery have the right to decide how and when to end their life? Arguments for why euthanasia should be allowed Those in favour of euthanasia argue that a civilised society should allow people to die in dignity and without pain, and should allow others to help them do so if they cannot manage it on their own. They say that our bodies are our own, and we should be allowed to do what we want with them. So it's wrong to make anyone live longer than they want. In fact making people go on living when they don't want to violates their personal freedom and human rights.It's immoral, they say to force people to continue living in suffering and pain. They add that as suicide is not a crime, euthanasia should not be a crime. Arguments for why euthanasia should be forbidden Religious opponents of euthanasia believe that life is given by God, and only God should decide when to end it. Other opponents fear that if euthanasia was made legal, the laws regulating it would be abused, and people would be killed who didn't really want to die. What's your opinion? Do you agree with any of those arguments above? do you have other reasons why you are for or against euthanasia?
I think it should be possible. I don't believe in God and I do respect the people who do but I think life is not given by God. And, people have to give personal consent! People should decide what to do with their bodies themselves so I think euthanasia should be possible.
I agree with it for pretty much every reason listed in the original post on why people agree with it. I feel if someone wants to die, they should every right to.
Euthanasia is the practice of terminating the life of a person or animal in a painless or minimally painful way in order to prevent suffering or other undesired conditions in life. I am for it. A person who has no chance of regaining a meaningful life should have the right to decide to go on or not. So many diseases are painful and the road to an inevitable death can be long. Why make them tough it out?
its a personal choice and i think that choice needs to be respected. for me, absolutely. if i go into a coma and am termed brain dead or vegetative or will never wake up i dont want that on my family. not to mention the damage that is done to your brain and body when in a coma, i feel like i wouldnt be the same person anymore. i saw something on discovery channel about a man who had been in a coma for 20 years and woke up. he couldnt move because his muscles degenerated, he could barely talk and thought it was still 1986. i wouldnt want that life for myself. comparing the quality of life for myself, the strain on my family, and the cost involved, being kept alive like that is not something i would want.
I think that there's nothing wrong euthanasia but if we were to allow it I think there should be a copule restrictions. 1. You must be of sound mind, so if you had alzheimers or something like that then you shouldn't be able to choose euthinasia. 2. If you ask for euthinasia you should have to talk with a therapist at least twice and if they say you're clincally depressed than no. 3. It muyst be only your choice, if you're in a veetative state than your either spouse or children should have no standing in terms of euthinasia.
OMG, it is SUCH a cowinkidink that this comes up, we are doing persuasive speeches and this is one of the topics. I am Pro euthinasia because well 1) people should have a living will saying like "if im in a vegitative state, kill me" or something. and also, if people are in a vegetative state or brain dead, there would be no point in keeping them alive, so why? I also agree with Calihan though, you would have to be aware of what your signing and remember it also. I don't think that parents or children or friends should be able to make the choice for you because if they do, and you still had a chance, then they just lost ya. It should be your choice
OK here is my take on this. Think of it like this; The world A continent A country A county A town/city A district A street A house A room A chair/bed Most of us, if we are lucky,start out with the world,which means we can go anywhere we want to. If you have a terminal disease as I do,you end up in a chair/bed.Your mind is still active but your body isn't,you cant do anything for yourself.You have to rely on others, sometimes complete strangers, to do everything for you and I mean everything. Think about what you do every day, going shopping,cooking a meal, going to the bathroom, getting showered,everything that you normally do.Now think if you cant do these things for yourself,it's not much to look forward to.I already have DNR on my medical file,I would rather the money spent on keeping me alive for no other reason than just being alive, be spent on research in to these conditions. Sorry to go about this,I believe everyone has the right to choose, we will never all agree on this, but in the end it's personal choice. OK lets think happy thoughts now!!! Take care.
I am totally pro euthanasia. Of course it has to be the person him/herself who gives the permission. If you think it's suicide, that those people don't think their loved ones. First, the person will die - sooner or later. Second, you are not there in bed, feeling the pain or just sleeping there. Third, having tubes all around your body, not knowing what happens around you, with no hope of cure. It's your own decision. I watched 6 months my grandpa at home when he got more gray, speak was more confusing, the medicine was strong and I'm sure so was pain. I remeber when he once had to be a week in the hospital (he was mostly kept at home because he wanted, only last week in hospital and of course some day or two visits there) and when he got home ( I didn't get to see him in the hopspital) but when he game back.. he was so gray that I almost started to cry when I saw him. I do not want to go thru that pain what he did. I don't want to stay in tubes for months/years if there is no hope for me. Now that we are on a subject, I suggest you watch the spanish movie Mar adentro (The Sea Inside)
While I think that euthanasia should be legal, it can be a really touchy subject. I believe the amounts of red tape up around it is good, but I would much prefer that rather focus on euthanasia, they look to prevent people from being in the position that they want to die. I understand why the terminally ill might prefer such a thing, but its all a question of their quality of life. I have no doubt that the system would be abused if it were to be put into place, which is one reason I'm cautious about it.
I am definitily for euthanasia. Since I am from Holland and it is legal here, I know what the choice can be. But I also know it isn't an easy one. Seems to me that a lot of people who don't really understand euthanasia look at as if doctors go running around with their medications and just put people to sleep. It isn't like that. At all. Its a long road. Talking with doctors, discussing with your relatives. And eventhough you think life has gotten pointless, its still the doctor who decides... and they are more likely to say "no" than "yes". And he has to consult at least one other doctor who doesn't know the patient. But most of all, the patient must be capable to express his or her own dying wish... But people have the right to decide for their own lifes. I think its a basic right what you wanna do with your life. And if all you can do is lay in a bed, waiting for you to die when you're in pain or when you're so confused you no longer understand the world and you've become all that what you never wanted to be.. than it is your right to end it. And I think people should always have that right. It still bothers me that in some cases doctors say no. Because people sometimes do turn to other ways to end their life. Who are we (you, me, doctors, religious fanatics..) to say how someone should life or die?
My great aunt has recently been diagnosed with alzheimers, and so I know a bit about it. At the beginning of the disease, the sufferer is mostly lucid, just has lapses occasionally, if it were me, I would want to be euthanised when it got so bad that I lucid less often that...crazy. (Excuse the use of that word, lol.) So maybe a signed agreement at diagnosis would be the best way to go about it? My Grandmother had terminal lung cancer and was hospitalised, she was in a great deal of pain, and knew that it was only going to get worse. We don't really know what happened to her, but she was found dead with an empty pill packet next to her. We believe that maybe one of the nurses gave her them, not told her to take them or anything, but just helped her out. She was fully aware of what she was doing. I remember the last time I saw her, I think I was 9, she was a bag of bones, in obvious pain, when I left her then I knew I wasn't going to see her again, and I think so did she. I am totally fine with the way things happened, we didn't complain to the hospital, nothing was said. My family and I understand that she didn't want any of us to see her getting worse, and helpless, so she stopped the suffering for all of us. Therefore I am pro-euthanasia. I think if it had been legal in England, then things could have ended more peacefully for her. (I have heard that overdosing causes nausea and things.) So there we go, my little story.
LANSING, Mich. - For nearly a decade, Dr. Jack Kevorkian waged a defiant campaign to help other people kill themselves. The retired pathologist left bodies at hospital emergency rooms and motels and videotaped a death that was broadcast on CBS' "60 Minutes." His actions prompted battles over assisted suicide in many states. But as he prepares to leave prison June 1 after serving more than eight years of a 10- to 25-year sentence in the death of a Michigan man, Kevorkian will find that there's still only one state that has a law allowing physician-assisted suicide — Oregon. Experts say that's because abortion opponents, Catholic leaders, advocates for the disabled and often doctors have fought the efforts of other states to follow the lead of Oregon, where the law took effect in late 1997. Opponents defeated a measure in Vermont this year and are fighting similar efforts in California. Bills have failed in recent years in Hawaii, Wisconsin and Washington state, and ballot measures were defeated earlier by voters in Washington, California, Michigan and Maine. Kevorkian's release could spur another round of efforts, if only to prevent anyone else from following his example. "One of the driving forces of the (Oregon) law was to prevent the Jack Kevorkians from happening," said Kate Davenport, a communications specialist at the Death with Dignity National Center in Portland, Ore., which defended Oregon's law against challenges. "It wasn't well regulated or sane," she said. "There were just too many potential pitfalls." Kevorkian, 79, was criticized even by assisted suicide supporters because of his unconventional practices. He used a machine he'd invented to administer fatal drugs and dropped off bodies at hospital emergency rooms or coroner's offices, or left them to be discovered in the motel rooms where he often met those who wanted his help. At the time, some doctors didn't want to give dying patients too much pain medication, fearing they'd be accused of hastening death. Oregon law allows only terminally ill, mentally competent adults who can self-administer the medication to ask a physician to prescribe life-ending drugs, and they must make that request once in writing and twice orally. Oregon's experience shows that only a tiny percentage of people will ever choose to quicken their death, said Sidney Wanzer, a retired Massachusetts doctor who has been a leader in the right-to-die movement. From the time the law took effect in 1997 until the end of last year, 292 people asked their doctors to prescribe the drugs they would need to end their lives, an average of just over 30 a year. Most of the 46 people who used the process last year had cancer, and their median age was 74, according to a state report. Experts say the attention on assisted suicide has helped raise awareness caring for the terminally ill. "End-of-life care has increased dramatically" in Oregon with more hospice referrals and better pain management, says Valerie Vollmar, a professor at Oregon's Willamette University College of Law who writes extensively on physician-assisted death. Opponents and supporters of physician-assisted death say more needs to be done to offer hospice care and pain treatment for those who are dying and suffering from debilitating pain. "The solution here is not to kill people who are getting inadequate pain management, but to remove barriers to adequate pain management," said Burke Balch, director of the Powell Center for Medical Ethics at the National Right to Life Committee, which opposes assisted suicide. "We need to come up with better solutions to human suffering and human need," Balch said. More end-of-life care is needed, but doctors should have a right to assist those who ask for their help in dying, Wanzer said. "There are a handful of patients who have the best of care, everything has been done right, but they still suffer. And it's this person I think should have the right to say, `This is not working and I want to die sooner,'" Wanzer said. Kevorkian has promised he'll never again advise or counsel anyone about assisted suicide once he's out of prison. But his attorney, Mayer Morganroth, said Kevorkian isn't going to stop pushing for more laws allowing it. The state wants to go after money that Kevorkian makes following his release to help cover the cost of his incarceration. Morganroth has said his client has been offered as much as $100,000 to speak. Many of those speeches are expected to be on assisted suicide. "It's got to be legalized," Kevorkian said in a phone interview from prison aired by a Detroit TV station on Monday. "I'll work to have it legalized. But I won't break any laws doing it."