Ending The Pain Inside Essay, Research Paper
Ending the Pain Inside
Euthanasia is a controversy that has risen in the later part of the 20th century. It has shown up in courts such as the Michigan Supreme Court in 1994 with Dr. Jack Kevorkian and, voting ballots in California, Washington, and Oregon. However, only the state of Oregon approved assisted suicides. According to Richard L. Worsnop in the CQ Researcher, these are the main factors that make up the controversy, “The controversy over aid-in-dying, involves not a single practice, but at least three: (1) forgoing or ceasing artificial life support in cases of terminal illness; (2) providing a terminally ill person with the means to end his or her life after the person has requested such help; and (3) actively causing a terminally ill person’s death” (Worsnop, Richard L.). Opinion polls indicate Americans are closely divided over laws allowing terminally ill patients to end their lives with a physician’s help. In my conviction, euthanasia is a civil right to everyone weather it is the removal of life support systems, pursuit of happiness, or relief from terminal illnesses.
We all have the right to remove life support systems and die; this should carry over into the practice of euthanasia. Assisted suicide can help relieve the pain and suffering of terminal diseases: “Relief of suffering, always a major goal of medicine, provides the best rationale for legal aid-in-dying for the terminally ill” (”Assisted Suicide Controversy”409). This quote shows euthanasia can be an act of medicine and a humane way to rid the emotional and physical pain of the terminally ill. However, some people believe this advocates the taking of life and no matter the reason, it is a form of killing. People who believe this are blind to the humane logic involved with this practice.
The act of assisted suicide is a constitutional right to every in the United States of America. The Constitution states, “Life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.” The pursuit of happiness means if euthanasia takes the pain away and makes you happier, then you have the right to exercise this given right. People who are opposed to the legalization of euthanasia fear it will not just end with the terminally ill, but will spread and then become open to abuse of the practice. A judge named Judge Rothstein holds this opinion, “allowing any exception to a total ban will encourage the gradual development of a more permissive attitude toward (assisted) suicide.” I think this “fear” will not become present if the government can setup guidelines for this procedure and have it performed upon strict observation at certified hospitals or clinics. Some of the guidelines can include whether or not to perform the procedure depending on the duration of the patient’s illness and the severity of the disease with a medical doctor certified to perform this procedure after obtaining a degree through specialized classes and training.
Put yourself in the position of the terminally ill patients that request aid to die. How would you feel if you sat in bed all the time, didn’t have the energy to move, and suffered from constant pain? These are only some of the horrible characteristics of terminal illnesses. People that are opposed to the idea of assisted suicide need to consider how life is like in the other person’s eyes. You can’t judge a person fully until you have experienced everything they have in their life.
It is comforting to have a choice of when to end your life at your own discretion. Many people share this feeling of comfort. It is solely up to the person to make the decision of terminating their life and no one else. The government should not be telling its people what to do with their lives and whether or not they can terminate it. When laws say euthanasia is an act of crime, part of people’s freedom is taken away. This country is based on freedom and that is why it exists today and because of this, people have a civil right to euthanasia.
Комментариев на модерации: 1.