This article has been cited by other articles in PMC. Abstract Background Euthanasia is one of the most intriguing ethical, medical and law issues that marked whole XX century and beginning of the XXI century, sharply dividing scientific and unscientific public to its supporters and opponents. It also appears as one of the points where all three major religions Catholic, Orthodox, and Islamic have the same view.
A Euthanasia mercy or crime in palliative care in places around the world is not enough to justify its circumvention. Legalizing physician-assisted suicide is merely a part of the debate about improving end-of-life care. It cannot be viewed as a quick and easy fix, or a way to protect patients from inadequate care arrangements.
Too many people still suffer needlessly, often because doctors and families just do not know how to serve people who are dying. The main problem lies with a lack of knowledge. Many suffer because doctors fail to provide adequate medication for pain.
To legalize physician-assisted suicide would make real reform, such as better pain control, less likely.
And ultimately hurts the growth of the medical industry. Without the reform of pain medication, patients end up with no prospects to live well while dying. In this scenario, making suicide an option is not offering a genuine choice but instead forcing a decision on the patient who again loses rights under this plan the affirmative have presented.
How to Save a Life In addition, if there are those whose death is inevitable who would like to be put out of their suffering early, it means that doctors will have a chance to examine their vital organs to see if they can be donated.
At later stages of many terminal illnesses, organs are severely weakened and, in some cases, failing - it may not be possible to use them at that point. This will help alleviate the long waiting list there is for organ donations. More thanmen women and children are waiting for organ transplants in the US alone with only 14, eligible donors.
PAS is an effective and ethical avenue to decrease this vast and fatal gap. Regardless of whether or not a patient decides to under PAS, they have already made the decision to be an organ donor, or not, well before the procedure. There has not been a correlation shown between the number of people willing to be an organ donor if they underwent PAS From the Oregon studies.
We would also say that a push for organs would decrease the amount of care given even with a PAS. Because now the focus is not on the patient but on their organs. In the status quo, people who are registered donors are at times kept on life support against against their will, something we though, the proposition did not like to determine the organs sustainability for transplant.
Finally, if patients who have been cleared for PAS under the guidelines set out by the proposition, then they are already terminally ill, and thus, have failing organs already, not in good enough condition for transplant.
Since we on the proposition are on a similar pursuit as Michelangelo in creating a masterpiece, lets first look at what supporting physician-assisted suicide is not: The opposition has stated time and time again how palliative care can be a good thing but just needs reform.
This offers no direct clash with our plan and our line of argumentation throughout the entire debate. We recognize that palliative care as a viable option for patients, but we also have pointed out some of the pitfalls of palliative care and how PAS can be a benefit to those who have to suffer in these pits in some countries currently.
Reform can be achieved in both PAS and palliative care under our plan. Fundamentally, we respect the preference of the patient to choose whichever option. The proposition is on the side of options and a death with dignity for citizens. While this concern is certainly respectable, it is based simply on predicative fears.
These fears have been discredited with the empirical evidence that we have provided from countries and states in which PAS is already supported. It is time to break free from the shackles of these ideals into a world where citizens are individually empowered by supporting the right-to-die.
Day by day more and more governments and citizens are recognizing this right and are strongly disavowing the antiquated positions that our opposition has argued for.Mercy killing or euthanasia "Euthanasia means as an action which aims at taking the life of another at the latter's expressed request.
It concerns an action of which death is the purpose and the result. Euthanasia - "mercy death" The mankind rebel against God of the Bible in many ways. One of this kind of rebellion is euthanasia in other words merciful killing or mercy death.
Therefore, the mankind in the end of times "legalize" euthanasia as mercy death, even it is sinful suicide, killing and a murder. which is classified a crime of. On the other hand, euthanasia can be regarded as a crime such as malicious murder, homicide or man hunting if it is not proven that it is an act of mercy killing.
Those who oppose euthanasia have several reasons ranging from the religious, legal, political, medicinal, technological advancement, social and .
Euthanasia - "mercy death" The mankind rebel against God of the Bible in many ways. One of this kind of rebellion is euthanasia in other words merciful killing or mercy death. Therefore, the mankind in the end of times "legalize" euthanasia as mercy death, even it is sinful suicide, killing and a murder. which is classified a crime of. Euthanasia: Mercy or Just a Crime? Sarah Carlton English Mr. Lassell Radical Revision What is Euthanasia? Euthanasia is a term that means ending someone's life to free one from pain and suffering. The debate specifically says "Do you agree or disagree with euthanasia or mercy killing?". What is being advocated is the right of an individual to make a decision, not to have a say or coerce an individual to make the decision to want to die.
West's Encyclopedia of American Law states that "a 'mercy killing' or euthanasia is generally considered to be a criminal homicide" Among interpretations of the Koran and Hadith, the early termination of life is a crime, be it by suicide or helping one commit suicide.
The various positions on the cessation of medical treatment are mixed and. "Euthanasia is a long, smooth-sounding word, and it conceals its danger as long, smooth words do, but the danger is there, nevertheless.
American author Pearl S. Buck "The care of human life and happiness and not their destruction is the first and only legitimate object of good government.". Mercy killing or euthanasia "Euthanasia means as an action which aims at taking the life of another at the latter's expressed request.
It concerns an action of which death is the purpose and the result.