Euthanasia
Ethics Essay 10/28/12
Pg.1
Euthanasia
A famous Roman philosopher named Lucius Annaeus Seneca once said, “Just as I shall select my ship when I am about to go on a voyage, or my house when I propose to take a residence, so I shall choose my death when I am about to depart from life.” Euthansia is the practice of intentionally ending one’s life in order to relieve pain and suffering. Euthansia has been in debates since the early 1900’s. Many countries have set up bills for this but they have all been denied. Everyone has the right to choose if they want to die, religion should not matter, living wills are allowed and there would be more vital organs.
The right of a competent, terminally ill individual to avoid excruciating pain and to embrace a timely and dignified death then they should be allowed to die. This exercise to end one’s life is as close to integrity as rights protected by laws relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, ways to raise a child and the refusal or termination of life-saving medical treatment. For example, when a family or loved one has no chance of coming out of a
“vegetative state.” In particular, recent decisions concerning the right to refuse medical treatment and the right to abortion show that a mentally competent, terminally ill individual has the freedom in bringing about his or her own death because of some intolerable pain.
What if one’s religion believes that they should have the right to die with dignity? Should we just ignore their first amendment right in these cases like these? When a person’s life is extended beyond the will or ability to sustain that dignity, they should be allowed to choose to die. There should also be no civil or criminal penalties of those who help a terminally ill individual undergo euthanasia. Therefore, religious beliefs should not be included in deciding whether or not euthanasia should be allowed.
Living wills are
Pg.1
Euthanasia
A famous Roman philosopher named Lucius Annaeus Seneca once said, “Just as I shall select my ship when I am about to go on a voyage, or my house when I propose to take a residence, so I shall choose my death when I am about to depart from life.” Euthansia is the practice of intentionally ending one’s life in order to relieve pain and suffering. Euthansia has been in debates since the early 1900’s. Many countries have set up bills for this but they have all been denied. Everyone has the right to choose if they want to die, religion should not matter, living wills are allowed and there would be more vital organs.
The right of a competent, terminally ill individual to avoid excruciating pain and to embrace a timely and dignified death then they should be allowed to die. This exercise to end one’s life is as close to integrity as rights protected by laws relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, ways to raise a child and the refusal or termination of life-saving medical treatment. For example, when a family or loved one has no chance of coming out of a
“vegetative state.” In particular, recent decisions concerning the right to refuse medical treatment and the right to abortion show that a mentally competent, terminally ill individual has the freedom in bringing about his or her own death because of some intolerable pain.
What if one’s religion believes that they should have the right to die with dignity? Should we just ignore their first amendment right in these cases like these? When a person’s life is extended beyond the will or ability to sustain that dignity, they should be allowed to choose to die. There should also be no civil or criminal penalties of those who help a terminally ill individual undergo euthanasia. Therefore, religious beliefs should not be included in deciding whether or not euthanasia should be allowed.
Living wills are