Running Head: EUTHANASIA 1

Name

Tutor

Institution
EUTHANASIA 2

Euthanasia can be said to be intentional termination of a persons life especially if they

are terminally ill. It can take place with the consent or request of the individual with an incurable

condition or otherwise without their consent. Numerous arguments for and against euthanasia

based on various ethical, professional, religious and legal concepts in place in different countries

exist. Euthanasia brings up a series of ethical questions. One is whether it is right to terminate the

life of a critically ill patient experiencing extreme suffering and pain. Another one is whether

there is a difference between ending ones' life and waiting for them to die. Finally is the question

of when the conditions are right for euthanasia to be justifiably applied. Central to these

arguments are the values of life and death possessed by a people and how they perceive human

beings having authority over life and death. It is argued that if it is allowed, malicious people can

manipulate its existence to use as a cover-up for murder (Van der Maas, 1991).

There are various ways through which euthanasia is carried out. It can be done by taking

actions that will lead to the demise of the subject or by not taking actions that are apparently

keeping them alive. If a patient refuses to be involved in extraordinary medical care or

burdensome medical assistance, then it is not euthanasia. There are cases of the doctrine double

effect whereby a doctor administers a painkiller to a patient but the drug lead to the patient's

condition deteriorating and possibly death. This is not euthanasia since the intention was to kill

the pain (Van der Maas, 1991).

One key argument for euthanasia is that it is for the benefit of the patient by alleviating

their pain and suffering. Statistics, however, tend to contradict this claim. In the United States

and Netherlands, less than a third of euthanasia requests were due to severe pain. Psychological

factors too can lead to applying for euthanasia include dislike of being dependent and feeling like
EUTHANASIA 3

a burden, depression, and fearing loss of dignity. All these issues result in the loss in the quality

of life (Rachels, 1986).

Oregon was the first state to pass the Death With Dignity Act in 1994. The act allowed

for terminally ill people to end their lives through the self-administration of lethal medications.

The number of people opting for this has been rising steadily since 1998. There is, however, a

discrepancy between the number of people who took the prescriptions and those who died. The

Other States including Washington have since followed suit. In Europe, a Swiss organization

called Dignitas helps terminally ill people be allowed to die with dignity. The diagram below

shows the number of individuals who chose euthanasia in Oregon.

EUTHANASIA 4

Physicians face the moral dilemma when they have to decide whether or not to carry out

euthanasia. It is not only a question of professionalism but also that one of their religious and

philosophical inclinations. In cases of physician-assisted suicide, there are more religious and

non-religious objections than in terminal sedation or withdrawal of life support according to a

survey carried out.

EUTHANASIA 5

References

Image courtesy of http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2014/jul/18/how-many-

people-choose-assisted-suicide-where-it-is-legal

Van der Maas, P. J., Van Delden, J. J., Pijnenborg, L., Looman, C. W., of Statistics, C. B., &
Hague, T. (1991). Euthanasia and other medical decisions concerning the end of life. The Lancet,
338(8768), 669-674.
Rachels, J. (1986). The end of life: euthanasia and morality.