The Right to Die: Euthanasia - Essay Example

The Right to Die: Euthanasia Euthanasia, also called assisted suicide or mercy killing, has been a contentious subject to people, countries and cultures for many hundreds of years. Individual freedoms of choice that are present and expected during life should also extend to the end of life. The compassionate treatment given animals that are terminally sick or injured and are suffering should be given to people too. Opponents of euthanasia suggest that the procedure is a ‘slippery slope’ that would permit increasing occurrences of coerced suicide, family pressuring their elderly relatives not to delay their impending demise for economic reasons. Additionally, legalized euthanasia would lessen the necessity to develop new medicines designed to extend life. Those who are against the procedure on religious grounds contend that it is ‘playing God’ thus sinful. Health care professionals refer to the Hippocratic Oath which prohibits them from doing this procedure. While there are many people who have written against Euthanasia laws, including Kay Olson (2007) and Lauren O’Brien (2005), these opinions are typically addressing isolated abuses in the system or individual cases in which end of life counseling would or should have been able to avoid mistakes. Olson, for example, details the circumstance of a particular woman who was not competent to argue for herself and, through many abuses within the system concentrated on monetary concerns instead of humanitarian ones, was a casualty of the Oregon euthanasia laws. O’Brien shows how a thriving writer might have unintentionally cut short an exceptional career had euthanasia been a choice at the time he first endured a paralyzing accident. Opponents to state-sanctioned euthanasia claim that the practice would be in violation of the Hippocratic Oath and that it also would result in a devaluation of human life. Life is held as sacred in America more so than in some other countries consequently the decisions other cultures make regarding euthanasia are irrelevant. Legalized euthanasia could lead to the killing of patients whose conditions are not terminal. Although the vast majority of physicians are ethical, not all are. While most doctors are principled and dedicated to excellent patient care, insurance companies are concerned only with profits, not patients, and may start to pressure doctors into ending the lives of people who are costing the company thousands of dollars per week. (Messerli, 2007). Another example of abuse can be seen in Olson’s (2007) report in which a woman who is non-verbal with special needs is shown to be a victim of such exploitation and sacrificed for the benefit of a financial balance sheets Insurance companies have too much power to influence health care decisions as it is. Legalized euthanasia would only amplify this power. Plus, assume the doctor made an error in the diagnosis? No one could ever know for certain if they did or didn’t but this possibility would always be present in the minds of the loved ones left living. The case reported in O’Brien shows how even when the doctors are correct, the man was told he would continue to be paralyzed and could only realistically expect to live the rest of his years in inactivity, that did not stop him from living a fulfilling and fruitful life. 2005). Doctors, philosophers and lawmakers have debated the idea of euthanasia since the beginning of recorded time but the wide public debate concerning its legalization has surfaced only over the past three or four decades. The debate over euthanasia embraces impassioned and compelling arguments on both sides of the issue. Proponents of euthanasia are interested in curbing human suffering. Many diseases, cancer for example, cause a persistent and excruciatingly agonizing death. Witnessing a loved one as they shrivel away from the illness eating away at their bodily organs is hard enough on members of the family, but to see them endure incredible pain even when drugs are given is unbearable. The patient, of course, is the one who endures the most pain. This physically and emotionally torturous circumstance is played out in every hospital, every day of the year yet serves no purpose. To many, it is inconceivable to allow anyone, and especially a loving old grandmother who has devoted her life caring for others, to spend the last six months of her life enduring continuous pain, coughing, vomiting, unable to control bodily functions, convulsing, etc. The psychological pain for both the patient and family is unimaginably horrendous as well. If grandma were a dog, everyone would agree that the only humane choice would be to ‘put her to sleep.’ American citizens are guaranteed certain rights but not the humane right to ‘die with dignity.’ The right of euthanasia is not forbidden by the Constitution, only by religious zealots who clearly value a dog’s life ahead of grandmas. People suffering from Alzheimer’s may not experience physical pain but undergo a different kind of pain which generally lasts for a long period of time. Alzheimer’s is a degenerative disease causing the patient to ramble incoherently and lose their memory. Many people who led active, vibrant, active purposeful lives are remembered by their family members in this undignified, vegetative state. There is a perpetual shortage of health care professionals, especially nurses, whose time could be used in a more productive way such as on people who are not certain to die soon. Understaffed medical care facilities, despite their best efforts, provide a diminished quality of care to everyone. Due to shortages, patients who would benefit from quality care sacrifice their health for people that are suffering a slow, excruciating and undignified death. The price of health care overall would be lowered as people with no hope of living no longer consume the available manpower and resources which would translate to lower health care and health insurance rates. Health care costs have climbed over the past decade and as the ‘baby boom generation’ becomes older, this problem will increase exponentially which benefits no one. Euthanasia also allows for organs such as hearts, livers and kidneys to be taken for transplant into otherwise well individuals with a potential for many more years of life. While it may be emotionally morose to consider such things, in a world where medical miracles occur daily which might permit another person a chance at a more fulfilling existence, such considerations should be made. In the real world, it is more likely that a person will decide to first save the young child from an oncoming bus rather than an old man. By the same token, it seems unbelievable that today’s society would opt to allow a child to suffer die due to lack of care so that a terminally patient is forced to live a few more agonizing fays or months. This, in effect, is the consequence of disallowing people to die with dignity. Many terminally ill people choose to end their own life to avoid the detriments of a terminal illness. The word euthanasia is from Greek origin meaning ‘good death.’ (Definition, 2007). The regrettable reality is most people in the U.S. die a ‘bad death.’ Recent Oregon and UK laws demonstrate that reasonable laws can be crafted which prevent abuse yet still protect the value of human life. For example, laws could be made that requires the authorization of two doctors plus a psychologist, a realistic waiting period, a family members’ written consent and limits the procedure to explicit medical conditions. The debate focuses on individual autonomy, whether or not people who suffer from extreme pain and have a degenerative and/or terminal disease such as AIDS, Alzheimer’s and multiple sclerosis have the right to an euthanasia of the type and time of their own choosing. Works Cited “Definition of Euthanasia.” Medicine.net. (2007). May 28, 2011 Messerli, Joe. “Should an incurably-ill patient be able to commit physician-assisted suicide?” Balanced Politics. (March 4, 2007). May 28, 2011 O’Brien, Lauren. “Opposing Legalization of the Right to Die.” Emmitsburg Area Historical Society. (2005). May 28, 2011 Olson, Kay. “Euthanasia in Oregon.” The Gimp Parade. (March 18, 2007). May 28, 2011 Read More