The Euthanasia Lobby Has Hijacked Dying With Dignity Summary

A subject of controversy acquiring a comprehensive magnitude of media attention and conversation in recent times is that of euthanasia and the notion of ‘dying with dignity’. In an opinion piece titled ‘The euthanasia lobby has hijacked ‘dying with dignity’’ published in The Age on 17th November 2014, writer Jack De Groot argues against the legislation of euthanasia, as he believes that there are additional alternatives which are more appropriate, such as palliative care. The tone established by the writer is knowledgable, sympathetic and at times cynical and malicious, intended to highlight, to his audience of euthanasia supporters and those undecided on the issue, his reasons as to why palliative care is a more dignified option for the dying.

The writer uses the technique of maligning the opposition, the supporters of euthanasia, which situates the reader in a position where they are prone to disfavour them. De Groot uses the connotative word ‘hijacking’ to suggest that euthanasia supporters deem that they claim ownership of the concept of dying with dignity. De Groot counteracts this belief by detailing the various people and their actions, which assist to “comfort the sick, the dying and their families.” This confronts the notion that the supporters of euthanasia seemingly disregard the effort of the “dedicated nurses, doctors and pastoral carers”, thus attempting to conjure feelings of disapproval toward the opposition as a reader. Similarly, De Groot criticises and and attacks international euthanasia legislation when he states that the “fragile aged, disabled and mentally ill” are pressured into assisted suicide. Readers will be inclined to believe that it is unethical and morally incorrect to influence people to be euthanised simply because they are at a certain age or have a particular illness. Therefore, by exposing the reader to this international experience toward the legalisation of euthanasia, they will be prone to