ABSTRACT
On the one side, the opportunity to die with dignity represents a private matter that should not be defined by political laws or governmental authorities. Life or death matters should remind entirely individual/personal choices. The prohibition of an assisted death for patients undergoing overwhelming pain will prolong the suffering of the patient and the beloved people. On the other side, the practice of euthanasia can be considered murder and dehumanizing from a religious or ethical viewpoint. Also, the process of ending someone’s life will weaken respect for the value of life, discourage efforts for critical disease research such as cancer, and diminish the care for patients with a terminal illness. Euthanasia involves concepts such as active, passive, voluntary, involuntary, and physician-assisted. A scenario involving active euthanasia requires a medium to cause death. The passive scenario involves the suspension of any treatment or supportive measures. Voluntary euthanasia requires the consent of the patient. Involuntary euthanasia refers to the consent of a guardian or custodian. Physician-assisted involves the use of medicine to end the life of a patient. The choice of ending life through euthanasia has created a massive wave of controversial thoughts related to the legalization of the practice. The following project covers pros and cons arguments towards the practice of premature ending of life. The following factors: legal procedures, ethical considerations, human rights, religious/spiritual viewpoint, economical outcomes, and social/cultural aspects were analyzed and explored to construct a critical opinion.
Figure 1:Morris, Pippa. “Ethics Questions Asked at Medical Interviews – Euthanasia.” TheMSAG. The Medical School Application Guide, 29 Jan. 2019. Web. 18 Dec. 2020.
1st_Draft: 1st_ControverSciPaper_WritingSci_
- Edition Reviews: Grammatical Errors, In-Text Citation.
Edited Version: NewVersion_Euthanasia