Euthanasia Research Paper Example

Kenan Malik claims “monopoly on truth and decency is no way to win the assisted dying debate”. Euthanasia is the deliberate ending of a person's life, generally for the purpose of ameliorating suffering. When people with a terminal illness or irreversible coma in severe agony request euthanasia, doctors may carry it out. It's a complex procedure that entails evaluating a variety of factors. I strongly believe that euthanasia should be legalised and think that it is inhumane that it hasn’t been decriminalised yet. A report from the BBC has confirmed that 82% of religious and non-religious people support euthanasia laws for terminally ill patients. 

An argument in favour of euthanasia would be that patients’ families are spared the pain of having to watch their loved one’s health slowly deteriorate as their personality becomes alienated, all whilst they are in tormenting and crippling affliction. A case that supports this argument would be Tony Nicklinson’s case. Tony Nicklinson, a man with locked-in syndrome who campaigned for the right to terminate his life lawfully, died on August 22, 2012. After having a stroke in 2005, the 58-year-old was paralysed from the neck down and characterised his life as a "living nightmare." Mr Nicklinson lost his High Court case to allow doctors to take his life a week before he died. He refused to eat after that. Mr Nicklinson had expressed his dissatisfaction with the High Court's determination that he could not end his life at his leisure with the assistance of a new doctor. He had assumed that his legal case would be successful, but he admitted that he had overlooked the emotional aspect of his request. Mr Nicklinson had written an advanced directive in 2004 stating that he did not want to receive any life-sustaining therapy. Therefore, Tony Nicklinson could not die with dignity although it is commonly said that health care providers must ensure that their patient dies with full dignity and control over their situation. Lives without dignity should be ended if that is what the patient desires (This might include the discontinuance or withholding of life-sustaining care, as well as the administration of a life-ending treatment directly). After all, surely, we all want the end of suffering for our loved ones.

In addition to my last point, keeping terminally ill patients alive with no enjoyable life or cure for their irreversible disease is expensive, and their treatment is very costly. In 2019, 75% of America’s health care costs were due to chronic illnesses. 40% of the USA’s 328 million population suffers from a mobility disease with no cure that affects their lives daily. In 2020 the US health care costs due to chronic diseases was set to increase by $133 million taking it up to a whopping $200 million which is a 198% increase since 2009 where 7/10 American deaths were due to incurable illnesses. A 2007 study shows that the 7 biggest killers were all chronic diseases such as cancer, stroke, heart disease, pulmonary conditions, diabetes, and hypertension, if we include mental illnesses then these chronic diseases have a toll of $1.3 trillion, and by 2023 that number is set to increase to $4.3 trillion in treatment costs and loss of economic output. 54% of medical practitioners agree with euthanasia and when the general public were asked if those who are terminally ill and/or are on life support should have the right to choose euthanasia, 86% agreed that it should be made an option, more importantly, the average percentage of patients suffering from chronic diseases that die in prodigious pain is 65%. 

Euthanasia also allows self determination, which is a legal right for all humans. Assisting death does not prohibit providing the finest palliative care possible; rather, it merges compassionate care and respect for the patient's autonomy, allowing for a dignified death. Some people may say that euthanasia leads to a ‘slippery slope’ of involuntary euthanasia, but they’re wrong. If a person has informed their family or doctors that they wish to be euthanized or that they would like euthanasia to be an option for them if they ever become terminally ill due to a chronic disease, then how could doctors ever be in too much power? As well as there being no evidence to support this claim, euthanasia could never lead to involuntary euthanisation as doctors and nurses aren’t going to kill unwilling patients. If this did happen, wouldn’t the families investigate their loved ones’ deaths if it happened suddenly and out with their knowledge? This would never occur, and it is foolish to presume that doctors would kill their own patients and that no family would scrutinise the situation if such an event were to occur. Although proper palliative care is available, this focuses on comfort; not cure. Therefore, why waste money keeping someone who wants to die and is in a great deal of pain alive? “Everybody wants a miracle, and medical miracles are amazing when they happen, but they’re just not that thick on the ground,” noted Dr. McPherson. Unfortunately, palliative medical practitioners are commonly the ones who must deliver this awful news to patients and their families. End-of-life conversations can be unpleasant for physicians to undertake, but they're critical for establishing the patient's future health care strategy—something palliative experts are well-trained to discuss competently. What people must understand is that practicality is not equal to barbarism.

Euthanasia allows compassion. When suffering is so intense that some patients, already aware that they are near death, make repeated appeals to die, refusing to enable them to fulfil their own plainly expressed request—after, of course, an appropriate procedure of protections has been observed—seems like a violation of that loving compassion. How can we deny the related patient the death we would want for ourselves in such a situation if we genuinely love them? It's not criminal to die (although it is currently punishable with up to 14 years in prison if you assist a terminally ill patients’ suicide). It is, without a doubt, tragic that some people refuse to live owing to a variety of factors. You should, however, accept their right to live and die. It isn't your business, and you should not violate other people's privacy. Diseases like cancer, HIV, and TB, for example, should not be overlooked. People are sentenced to suffer agony since their prospects of getting better are slim. If they don't have any option, they need this chance to transcend their misery. 

In 2001, The Netherlands became the first country to legalise euthanasia. Acts of euthanasia must be carried out in accordance with "careful medical practise to be considered legal in the Netherlands. Euthanasia requests must be voluntary, well-considered, and persistent, and made by patients who are in excruciating pain with little possibility of improvement. The decision must be made by more than one physician, and both the patient and the physician must agree that euthanasia is the sole rational choice.

In conclusion, euthanasia should be legalised for terminally ill individuals, I strongly believe that it is a moral act of compassion that ends ones suffering. Would you like to see a loved one suffer?