We will write a custom Essay on Palliative Medicine Replacement for Euthanasia specifically for you
301 certified writers online
Euthanasia is not about helping ill and dying people to end their pain and bring comfort. People with serious diseases do experience pain, however, they should not be rejected in their right to palliative care. Euthanasia gives people such as doctors and family members an opportunity to decide who has the right to live and who should die. Leaving aside the religious arguments, euthanasia weakens the societal respect for the sanctity of life as well as there is no proper way of regulating it. Euthanasia is a starting point leading to killing of people who are marked as undesirable.
From ethical standpoint, acceptance of euthanasia is based on discrimination. In other words, euthanasia promotes the assumption that some people (disables or sick) are less worthy than others (“Overview of arguments against euthanasia”). Patients with deadly diseases and disabilities causing physical and psychological sufferings cannot decide by themselves what is in their best interests. Euthanasia affects the rights of all people, including the rights of patients.
A patient who refuses to go through a fourth bound of chemotherapy is not committing suicide, but rather accepts the inevitability of his death. A doctor who withdraws the treatment of ill person does not kill a patient, but rather refuses to prolong the patient’s life. Thus, euthanasia is intentional act to end a patient’s life (Muehlenberg).
From practical standpoint, euthanasia leads to impoverishment of good care for terminally ill patients. Moreover, euthanasia is not necessary if palliative care is properly provided. Currently there is not way to regulate euthanasia. Undoubtedly, euthanasia is a cost-effective method, however, it discourages the search for new cures. Euthanasia undermines the core values of life and decreases the motivation to provide care for the dying. Acceptance of euthanasia gives too much power to healthcare specialists. “Legalizing the deliberate killing of humans fundamentally undermines the basis of law and public morality” (Beale and Horner).
From patients’ standpoint, euthanasia pressures vulnerable people to end their lives. Selfish people create moral pressure on elderly. Terminally ill people understand that their death will free up medical resources that could be used for other patients. In addition, there are many patients who are abandoned by their families and they consider death being the only solution. “If the choice of euthanasia is considered as good as a decision to receive care, many people will feel guilty for not choosing death”.
In conclusion, euthanasia is not voluntary because terminally ill people are not able to make reasonable decisions. No one should have the right to decide who should live and who should die. Patients should be hold responsible for financial and medical supplies. They should not feel guilty for being ill. Euthanasia discourages medical research for the new cures and more effective treatments. Terminally ill should be supported and encouraged to live. Euthanasia undermines the core ethical and moral values of society. Euthanasia is not a solution, it is a voluntary murder.
Arguments Against Euthanasia. Euthanasia.com. 2007. Web.
Beale, Nicholas and Stuart Horner. “Non-Religious Arguments against ‘Voluntary Euthanasia’.” StarCourse.org. 2007. Web.
Muehlenberg, Bill. The Case Against Euthanasia. 2007. Web.
“Overview of arguments against euthanasia.” Religion and Ethics – Ethical Issues. 2007. Web.