Euthanasia

Euthanasia is an existing and highly controversial subject with significant ethical and legal aspects. Many doctors and medicine practitioners around the globe do not seem to be able to come to an agreement. Some countries, though, have proceeded to its legalization, with Holland on the lead, causing a variety of reactions.

The term “euthanasia” literary means good, painless and glory death. As a medical term, it means intentional assistance for a quiet and easy death.

Euthanasia may be encountered in five different cases: (1) the euthanasia asked by patient; (2) the euthanasia asked by someone else when the patient is not capable, temporarily, to make such a decision; (3) the aggressive euthanasia when  the patient has no control on own life and therefore others are responsible for such a decision; (4) the passive euthanasia which reflects the conscious cause of death by stopping the effective treatment and (5) the energetic euthanasia that reflects deliberate damage in order to terminate the patient’s life.

Advocates of euthanasia claim that euthanasia should be used as a means to offer relief to incurable illnesses and to the great pain that a patient has to bear; a pain that is constant and requires large quantities of painkillers, only to put the patient at a drugged state. Eventually, the pain might be relieved, but the patient is not conscious of the environment. In this case, euthanasia releases the patient, not only from a meaningless life but also from a severe loss of self-respect.

In addition to the above claim about dignity, patients have to suffer the psychological pressure as well. For example, in cases of total infirmity, typically feelings of inferiority overwhelm the patients because they have absolutely no control on own life. Others decide when the patient needs to be fed, take a bath, change position on the bed and so on. Again, it is a matter of self-respect.

There are also cases that patients are in a coma for years, breathing with the help of medical equipment and with no hope of recovery. In situations like these, the advocates of euthanasia hold that it is not only the patient in coma but also the family and beloved ones. According to the libertarians, euthanasia promotes the best benefits of everybody implicated and violates no man’s rights. Therefore, it violates no moral rules.

Enemies of euthanasia consider it an act of murder. Religion plays a significant role here as, Christians mostly, believe that no person has the right to end someone’s life but God. As they claim, we are made in God’s image, we should respect this as something valuable, and we should not meddle with the natural course of death. Many people argue against assistant dying because they see constructive value in suffering. No one should ever deal with suffering by eradicating the ones who suffer. In addition to this, it makes no difference if a person leads a good quality life as being alive is precious itself.

Many assert that voluntary euthanasia could easily become a slippery slope. If voluntary euthanasia is legally permitted, it could easily become involuntary euthanasia. Appropriate rules and regulations should be taken in order to be legalized because the susceptible people-sick, elderly, or distraught- might experience pressure to demand premature death. To that end, studies have shown that doctors have subscribed lethal prescriptions for terminally ill patients in order to avoid medical costs. As a great amount of money is being spent for patients that are not expected to recover, such so called cost-conscious doctors may easily decide to proceed to euthanasia, however, with the intention of saving money or for releasing beds and not offering relief to patients.

People against euthanasia also support that there are numerous cases where euthanasia could be avoided. For an example, there are cases where the diagnosis may completely wrong and the patient is not in a terminal state. Another important consideration is also the psychological state of the patient.  A person with severe depressing symptoms cannot take a sensible decision such as euthanasia. Obviously, a patient that has no control on own life, cannot decide on terminating own life. Therefore, psychological support is crucial before discussions about possible euthanasia begin.

To sum up, to lean to one side or another is an intricate feat. However, regardless if euthanasia will be legalized or not, a patient’s life is sacred and doctors must drain every possible option before euthanasia remains the only choice.