Euthenasia In Australia Essay, Research Paper
Euthenasia In Australia
Sometimes, life can deteriorate to the point where a person loses their dignity and self-respect, and are unable to communicate; life like this is longer worth living, as the most enjoyable of things are no-longer enjoyable. Euthanasia could, in my opinion, be practiced when a person reaches this point, and then only passively. If the person in question is able to communicate rationally, then their opinion must be asked first.
Assisted death, other than passively should most definitely remain illegal, and in the Northern Territory, it should be made illegal. The nation of Australia must be uniformed, or else people simply go to another state, where the law different.
People should live their lives for as long as it is worth living, as defined above. Some people wish to use euthanasia to die when they are diagnosed with a terminal illness, and given a certain amount of time to live. These people still have those six months, or whatever. If they can, they should enjoy that time, doing all the things they like to do. If they wanted, they could go out and spend all their savings, or retirement money on things that ?I always wanted to get one?, or make themselves feel good by donating to charities. They should not look at the amount of time they don?t have, but instead, at the time they have left. And besides, we all know we are going to die, these people are no different, except they know exactly how much time is left. It has been said that trials and pain make us stronger. Even if someone is in pain, that pain could make them mentally stronger than if they give up and take the easy way out. Life is full of pain, and joy, everyone goes through both things in their lives, because that is what life is.
Some say that doctor-aided death is widespread already, only covertly, and that the Netherlands is a model of how to establish the right to die by bringing the practice out in the open, where the medical and legal system can oversee it. This issue is similar to how abortion was seen before it was legalized. The main reason for legalization of abortion was because it was being done anyway. People had access to abortion, it was just being done terribly. We’re in exactly the same situation today: People have access to assisted suicide; it’s just being done so badly. Just because something is done, that doesn?t mean that it should be legal. Many things that are illegal are done anyway. Look at drugs, underage drinking, drunk driving, and speeding; these things are all illegal and are frequently practiced. Should these or other things be legalized just because they are done anyway? This excuse is not a valid reason for legalizing anything.
Even if euthanasia were to be legalized, where would it end? Somehow I doubt that the terminally ill would be the only users. The world looks to the Netherlands as the only working model for assisted death. It is a nation known for its open approach to abortion, prostitution and drug use. In fact, ?caf?s? in the Netherlands are licensed to sell hash, and marijuana – 15 grams for $25. Hookers stand on the streets and know that they are safe from the police, and just about anything goes when it comes to advertising. This countries ?right to die? policy is what many activists look towards as an example of a working system, but they fail to take into account the other decisions (that are questionable at the very least) which have been devised by the same system – a failing one.
Sometimes change is needed to the laws in society. Sometimes things need to be changed for the benefit of society. Other things, however, must never be changed because it is simply wrong. It will always be wrong to steal, it will always be wrong to cheat, and it will always be wrong to kill.
Henry, Sarah. “The Battle Over Assisted Suicide: A Time to Die”
O’Keefe, Mark. “Doctor Assisted Suicide: Dutch Death”
Shavelson, Lonny. ?A Chosen Death; The Dying Confront Assisted Suicide?