• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Evaluate the ethical argument for and against keeping a person alive against his or her will.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Evaluate the ethical argument for and against keeping a person alive against his or her will. In the majority of countries today there is an existing law that states if a patient suffering from an incurable illness or from unbearable pain, asks their doctor to help end their lives, then they are putting them in a position to be charged with murder. Those that are in favour of voluntary euthanasia1 believe that this law should be abolished because they feel the patient should not have to suffer. In the Netherlands this law in not in forced and doctors are able quite openly to relieve a suffering patient and have been able to do so since the 1980's. In Holland it is believed that approximately one thousand assisted deaths occur in one year. The issue of euthanasia has been recognised for a very long time. The moral philosopher Hippocrates said 'I will not prescribe a deadly drug to please someone, nor give advice that may cause his death'. Euthanasia is frowned upon by many people, as it is a criminal offence in nearly all countries and strongly opposed to by governments and religious organisations. ...read more.

Middle

Direct euthanasia involves the use of something specific to cause it, and indirect euthanasia refers to cases where death occurs as a side effect of treatment. The third distinction is between active and passive euthanasia. Active euthanasia is the same as direct euthanasia as it is the intentional act of mercy killing. However, passive euthanasia is not the act of killing but of letting die, it allows the person to die while slowly withdrawing their treatment. Unusually, even the Roman Catholic Church accepts that sometimes a patient should be permitted to die. The church says that nobody has the right to kill but in the same respect, no one has the right to prolong someone's painful suffering. Voluntary euthanasia is often justified on the grounds that the death is preferable to the suffering that the person would have to undergo if their life was not terminated. Therefore, it is based on the expected results of physical or emotional pain. Contrary to this, involuntary euthanasia is when someone is killed in order to save them from additional suffering, but these people do not consent to their own death either because they are not asked or because when asked they choose to carry on living. ...read more.

Conclusion

They were not motivated by concern for the suffering of those being killed. If the laws were changed so that anyone could carry out an act of euthanasia there would be no boundaries for the killing of those competent or incompetent. Doctors already have a great deal of power over life and death as they have the ability to withhold any patient's treatment. It is believed by some that the legalisation of euthanasia may well act as a check on the power of doctors since it may bring into the open what some doctors may do in secret. The immorality of doctors is rarely questioned so it is unknown whether legalising euthanasia would be a good step to take when considering they way in which doctors work. People put a great deal of faith in their doctors but this may change if some doctors are discovered to be less moral and honest as was originally thought of them. Euthanasia is one of the most widely debated occurrences in many countries. It is a highly complex topic and may never cease to be differed over. Many principles have been offered as a way of understanding euthanasia but they do not give answers or ways around the massive problems that arise for many people and their relatives when faced with the right to live or the right to die. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Euthanasia section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Euthanasia essays

  1. Discursive Essay on Euthanasia.

    Each person has value and is worthy of respect, has basic rights and freedom and the power to choose their own destiny. One major argument is passive euthanasia against active euthanasia - This simply means that doctors can legally practise "passive" euthanasia - by taking away or withholding treatment even if the person will die.

  2. My hypothesis: Euthanasia should be legalized in the UK.I am going to answer a ...

    Care Not Killing is an organisation which intends to make sure that Euthanasia remains illegal in the UK. "Care Not Killing is a UK-based alliance of individuals and organisations which brings together human rights groups, healthcare groups, palliative care groups and faith-based organisations with the aims of: 1.

  1. What is meant by euthanasia?

    Here is a few examples of what was said in the report : (1) Euthanasia implies killing, an it is misleading to extend it to cover decisions not to preserve life by artificial means when it would be better for the patient to be allowed to die.

  2. Can Euthanasia be justified?

    None of the religious people who took the survey thought that the government should make laws about creating a timeline on use of facilities, whereas 50% of the non-religious people said that laws should be put into place. * Is there any moral difference between killing someone and letting them die?

  1. Christian Perspectives - Euthanasia is the intentional killing of a person.

    Death is a complicated subject. You might think it is simple to determine whether someone is dead but there have been many queries about being brain dead. Some people argue that once you are brain dead your are dead. People argue that there is no way to define when the brain is dead.

  2. “An acceptance of the practice ofvoluntary euthanasia is incompatible with Christian belief in the ...

    the terminally ill and have specially trained people to deal with all cases. Dame Cicely Saunders (7) writes that hospices relieve pain in nearly all of their patients. They use the same science and skill to help people die peacefully that surgeons use to preserve life in the operating theatre and intensive care units.

  1. Is Euthanasia morally acceptable?

    research was the third question because primary research is not suitable for all questions and euthanasia is a delicate topic to be asking the public about in to much detail. Therefore this being the only question that primary research would be suitable for.

  2. Choose a case which you consider to be of crucial importance for medical ethics ...

    It is for this very reason I believe the case was decided how it was. On the face of it it would appear that the arguments put forward, or at least some are rights the convention confer upon individuals are worthy of note, and their consideration by the ECHR reflects this.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work