Pros On Euthanasia

The right to life or death of human beings should be in the patients, the doctor's diagnosis or restricted and controlled under the framework of law and morality? The euthanasia is one of the most widely discussed in ethics and human rights, especially in Europe. It is not clear because of the meaning that it is unclear in many different cases which in each case, it is both right and wrong aspect. It is true that sometimes the humanity and morality or creed, it does not go in the same way. Euthanasia is making that person died intentionally in the way that non-violence or exclusion to help or treat that person including killing the pain of patients is being in a coma painful and suffering from a disease or incurable disease and leaving them

René Girard said that “The experience of death is going to get more and more painful, contrary to what many people believe. The forthcoming euthanasia will make it more rather than less painful because it will put the emphasis on personal decision in a way which was blissfully alien to the whole problem of dying in former times. It will make death even more subjectively intolerable, for people will feel responsible for their own deaths and morally obligated to rid their relatives of their unwanted presence. Euthanasia will further intensify all the problems its advocates think it will solve.” For example, in 1989, Tony Bland was squeezed in the field among football fans and there were deaths in this event. He survived but falls into persistent vegetative state and requires food to be fed through the feeding tube. In this case, both Tony's physician and parents agreed and asked the court to order Tony to stop feeding. If the doctor and his parents prolong Tony's life, he will next live with suffering. Finally, the British court ordered Tony to stop feeding, because he lacked human dignity and the end of his life was a better

We do not need to debate whether euthanasia is right or not. How do we know that the doctor did sincere done with good intentions or too lazy to work? Then, what criteria would that person be a hopeless patient? How do you know that the patient has no chance of survival? Did the doctor really try and still have other treatments? J.C Willke M.D. said that "Words are important. It is common, when people approach this subject, to look for the meaning of the word 'euthanasia' and to recall that its translation means 'good death.' This should be ignored and rejected, as it has absolutely no validity in the contemporary scene. Euthanasia is not a 'good death.' Euthanasia is when the doctor kills the patient." However, Medical Council must define the word "despair" to make clear that despair because doctors have no way to treat or they are not fully functional. For example, September 24, 2000, Mr. Vincent Humbert suffered a car accident into a coma patient. Many body parts do not move. He wrote a letter to request the right of death from the president with the use of physical signals to communicate. 1 month later, he received a letter back. "I cannot give what you have requested because the president had no right to do that.” Finally, the doctor and his mother decided to stop treatment. He died in the next year. After that, the doctor and his mother were charged with murder. Ex2 Another case that