Argumentative Essay In Favor of Euthanasia Essay

mercy killing is the administration of a permithal agent by another(prenominal) mortal to a diligent for the purpose of relieving the patients unsufferable and incurable suffering. When we talk or so mercy killing it is meant as a means to help mostone to achieve a goodish death. The major(ip)ity of those who seek euthanasia are destinationly ill and do not reserve any other options. Either they stay hot and suffer from the severe pain, the symptoms, and the side effects like bedsores, or they shape to end their agony and choose the only other alternative. Unlike what somewhat people think, euthanasia is used as a last recur and is only meant for people who face an imminent death. It is not meant to kill, only when to help the dying die with dignity. Given that e rattlingone has the right to die with dignity, as soon as the suffering comes to a decision to shorten his or her last days or weeks in order to end the insufferable pain, the society should accept it and do everything in their power to make it possible.Euthanasia is considered accepted among its supporters only if the following ethical guidelines are met. The person must be an adult in a rational state of mind, whose terminal suffering happens to be unbearable despite the best medical efforts. Secondly, the person must have clearly made a considered decision. As herds grass M. Quill illustrates in his essay Death and Dignity Diane, a fair sex diagnosed with terminal leukemia, her husband, and her son talked ab prohibited her disease and the options including word extensively however, She remained very clear about her wish not to undergo chemotherapy and to live whatsoever time she had left outside the hospital. An individual can let loose his or her preferences about healthcare at the end of bearing, for example by writing a living will, or even, in todays more open and tolerant society, freely discuss the option of euthanasia with a health-care professional or a family member .Timothy M. Quill notes in the same essay Dianes wish to die, once she lost constraint of herself and her dignity. She discussed this wish with her family and her doctor and communicateed them for their help and support. They were not happy about this, only they agreed to respect her choice, and that is what they did. Her doctor had regular meetings with her and talked to her about the doctrine of comfort care, but also about the Hemlock union. As her condition worsened, she called up her closest friends including her doctor and said auf wiedersehen to them. Two days later sheasked her husband and her son to leave her simply for an hour after saying goodbye to them. by and by an hour, they found her groundless covered by her favorite shawl. Euthanasia should not be carried out at the first knowledge of a life-threatening unhealthiness, and the individual must seek reasonable medical help to cure or at least slow down the progress of the terminal disease.Life is extraordina ry and is also worth a contradict. Euthanasia is only an option when the fight is hopeless and the agony unbearable. However, once the decision is made, the treating physician must be informed and his or her response should be considered. It is invariably possible, that the diagnosis has been misheard or misunderstood furthermore, the individuals decision could have been triggered by major depression or any other curable mental illness. I think everyone would agree that each physician confronted with a patient seek help to commit suicide should involve psychiatric consultation in order to rule out major depression before euthanasia should even be considered. After excluding any form of a treatable illness, it should be the physicians choice whether or not to assist the patient to commit suicide.Under normal circumstances we do not have the right to kill or to let someone die, but there are some exceptions to this rule. A physician is permitted to withhold treatment and let the p atient die, if it is so desired by the patient or a legal representative. However, if the same person under the same circumstances wishes to be helped directly in order to end his or her suffering, the physician is not allowed to assist this person put an end to his or her life. According to the American Medical Association The physician who performs euthanasia assumes unique responsibility for the coiffure of ending the patients life. On the other put across the AMA also states Physicians have an obligation to relieve pain and suffering and to advertise the dignity and autonomy of dying patients in their care.This includes providing effective palliative treatment even though it may foreseeably hasten death.The above statement shows us that AMA prohibits lively euthanasia, the administration of a lethal agent by another person to a patient for the purpose of relieving the patients intolerable and incurable suffering., yet allows nonoperational euthanasia, at least in some cases , towithhold treatment and allow a patient to die. crowd Rachels argues for why physicians should place passive euthanasia in the same family as active euthanasia. First, techniques of passive euthanasia extend the suffering of the patient, because it takes chronic to passively allow the patient to die than it would if active measures were taken.Second, Rachels argues that passive euthanasia encourages the physician to make decisions on irrelevant grounds. For example, children born with Downs syndrome often have correctable congenital defects, but sometimes the parents revoke the surgery, because they do not want a child with Downs syndrome therefore, they let the infant die. Rachels example might be a olive-sized extreme, but if we really want to be honest with ourselves, we should recognize that active euthanasia seems to be more humane in some cases than passive euthanasia.Advances in medical technology brought about a number of miracles to hold off us healthy and to help us live longer however, young medicine has not entirely solved the problem of terminal illness and pain. It has even contributed to the complication of the decisions we might be confronted with towards the end of our life, or the life of a loved one. We are going to face life-and-death decisions, we should always choose life over death when life is truly possible, but tragic circumstances can make the afterlife a break out life for some people. Euthanasia is an option not a destination. After all No one wants to live to be one hundred, until you ask the man who is ninety-nine.Referencepagehttp//www.starcourse.org/euthanasia.htmhttp//www.togopeacefully.com/http//www.missouri.edu/philwb/Quill.HTMTimothy E. Quill, M.D.Death and DignityA Case of Individualized Decision MakingPrinted in The New England Journal of Medicine,March 7, 1991, Vol. 324, No. 10, pp 691-694.http//www.banned-books.com/truth-seeker/1994archive/121_5/ts215n.htmlDeath and Dignity Making Choices and Taking deplume by Timothy E. Quill. W.W. Norton & Company, New York. 1993The American Medical Associationhttp//www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/ menage/8458.htmlhttp//www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/8457.htmlhttp//www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/8459.htmlJames Rachels Active and Passive