El sgher, Mohamed
Instructor Mohd Muzhafar Idrus (Mozac)
English Gold A2
26 April 2010
Should Very Sick People Have a “Right to Die”?
Euthanasia or the “right to die” has become debated issue recently as some countries such as Netherlands, Switzerland and Oregon State have already made it legal. However, most of the world still considers it to be a crime, and it must not be permitted by all means. Fans of euthanasia claim that it is mercy, freedom to choose, or even saving money. This is a deviated way of thinking calls for destroying every aspect of humanity and ethics. People who support euthanasia look at it only from materialistic point of view based on wrong assumptions.
Mercy is the main argument of people who are for euthanasia; it is merciful to end the unbearable suffering of a person. Some believe that people should have the right to end their suffering when their lives lose all the quality, and that is a crime to force people to live painful life they do not wish to continue (Girsh). On the contrary, it is supposed when people suffer, they get supported emotionally, given suitable pain relievers till their lives end naturally. It has nothing to do with mercy to kill people just to stop their suffering. Simply nobody knows weather that suffering will end by the end of a person’s life. Nobody knows which is more painful, either to kill patients with toxic doses or to let them die naturally. Also some corrupt doctors might abuse patients and misuse euthanasia just for their or somebody else’s good (RitaL and Hamlon ).
Cost reduction is another argument of those who support physician-assisted suicide. Merrill claims that in spite of the fact that the health care system in US is becoming more cautious in making sure that the money is not wasted, physician-assisted suicide can save more money to be exploited by others (Matthews). However, permitting euthanasia for the sake of cost reduction will make it the first option for poor people who cannot afford health care expenses. According to an article in New York State, assisted suicide and euthanasia would carry us into new terrain. The article states that American society has never sanctioned assisted suicide or mercy killing. It also mentions that Americans believe that the practices would be profoundly dangerous for large segments of the population, especially in light of the widespread failure of American medicine to treat pain adequately or to diagnose and treat depression in many cases. The article believes that risks would extend to all individuals who are ill. The risks would be most severe for those whose autonomy and well-being are already compromised by poverty, lack of access to good medical care, or membership in a stigmatized social group as the article insists. The risks of legalizing assisted suicide and euthanasia for these individuals, in a health care system and society that cannot effectively protect against the impact of inadequate resources and ingrained social disadvantage, are likely to be extraordinary according to the article (“New York State”).
The value of life is another ambiguous term that people look at from different perspective. Dan Brock, a director of the university program in ethics and health at the Harvard Medical School believes that no further life at all is still better than life with poor quality. He claims that “continued life is seen by the patient as no longer a benefit, but now a burden” (Brock). Nonetheless, Wesley Smith, a consultant in International Anti- Euthanasia Task force, believes that accepting euthanasia would alter the principle of equality-of-human-life with the practical “death culture”. The “Death culture” concept declares that intentional ending of people lives is the solution for the life’s most tough challenges (Wesley).
It should be obvious that euthanasia is just a crime of murder that does not differ much from other murders. It assumes that accelerating the patient’s death is mercy, and also saves some money. However, human ethics have been and would still be incomparable with materialistic criteria. Accepting euthanasia is dangerous and might get out of control someday; it might get broadened in the future, and become the easiest way to not face the life’s challenges. It would become another face for suicide but legal suicide. There is no doubt that euthanasia must be prohibited all over the world and considered as a crime before it becomes the solution for whoever is facing a problem such as a broken heart or business loss or an exam failing. People sometimes face problems and be in situations where they wish if they were died. If people have got the right to die whenever they wish, the human being might face the extinction someday.
Work cited
Brock, Dan.” Voluntary Active Euthanasia,”. 2 Mar.1992. Web. 24. Apr.2010.
Girsh, Faye. "How Shall We Die," Free Inquiry. N.d. Web. 25 Apr.2010.
Matthews, Merrill. “Would Physician-Assisted Suicide Save the Healthcare System Money?,” Physician Assisted Suicide: Expanding the Debate, 1998. Web. 25.Apr.2010.
RitaL, Marker and Kathi Hamlon. “Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide: Frequently Asked Questions.” internationaltaskforce.org. N.d. Web. 24 April 2010
Smith, Wesley J. Forced Exit. New York: Time books, 1997.
“When Death is Sought: Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia in the Medical Context”. New York State Task Force on Life and the Law. 1994. Web. 25.Apr.2010
