Euthanasia: Opinion Paper - Essay Example

? s Euthanasia Euthanasia has incited heated debates and countless legal battles ever since the concept came under discussion. Public opinion on Euthanasia oscillates between two extremes point of views that are either based on knowledge, personal experience or evaluation, but the subject has greater philosophical complexities that tie in the concept of living, pain and suffering besides 'death'. The composition by Rosenblatt and Peck discuss such complex matters to describe the exact nature of the issue. Peck adopts a more idealistic tone, whereas Rosenblatt uses Gilbert’s case to demonstrate all the ‘grey areas’ involved in euthanasia. The notion of euthanasia is more than just ‘pulling the plug’ on a patient as described by Scott Peck in his essay titled “Living is the mystery”, who is of the opinion that euthanasia can only be justified if it is a decision taken only by the affected parties. Peck calls it a ‘laissez faire attitude towards euthanasia’ or in other words it is euthanasia ‘On demand’ that is carried out with consent from the affected parties without any intervention from the physician’s side (Peck, 1997). According to him, physician-assisted suicide will lead to moral ramification and distort the real essence of life, in which pain and suffering are important constituents. It would further incite a legal and moral impasse as everyone would just take the easy way out and is also ideal for people, who already have suicidal ideations. Furthermore, there are high chances of foul play that would further complicate the matter. In concurrence with Peck’s beliefs, pain and suffering are subjective experiences that are important aspects of life; hence death cannot be the absolute solution to one’s problems. Administering lethal injections to terminally ill patients is not a decision that rests with the doctor, but it should be carefully considered by the individual and his or her relatives. If physicians are given the latitude to put an end to someone’s life that is a complete opposite of what they have initially sworn to do and also infringes upon the rights of the patients. The issue of Euthanasia is further elucidated by Gilbert’s case cited in Roger Rosenblatt’s essay titled “The quality of Mercy-killing”. Gilbert was convicted for shooting his wife of 51 years, Emily who had been suffering from Alzheimer’s. Gilbert’s situation is described in a dramatic tone, but the fact of the matter remains that he had been seeing his wife in the grips of a protracted illness was already distressful for Emily and triggered a sense of helplessness in Gilbert. His 62 year old wife suffered from a disease that had no prospects of a cure in the near future; therefore, Gilbert’s case brought a new side of the matter to the surface. Rosenblatt further comments in his composition that though there are several cases similar to that of Gilbert’s, but it is very unlikely that such cases will lead to a permanent shift towards a pro-euthanasia standpoint. Gilbert’s decision to shoot his wife is in stark contradiction to how the law expects a human being to behave. Nevertheless, taking Emily’s situation into account, the case itself is nothing short of a tragedy. It must have been a difficult choice for Gilbert to make that decision especially after spending 51 years with the same woman. Gilbert is often compared to Othello, a character who had murdered his wife out of love. However, Gilbert had a different motive in mind to finally put an end to Emily’s misery; which is described by Rosenblatt as a decision “which the outer world agrees with and denies”. (Rosenblatt, 1985) Euthanasia involves a number of factors, out of which, consent of the patient is of utmost importance. This facet is further validated through my observation which will be elaborated in light of my grandfather’s example, who suffers from Parkinson’s disease. The treatment for Parkinson’s is largely experimental and very little is known about the condition, hence it was only natural that my grandfather’s illness exacerbated immensely over time. Despite all the stress and hardships he faces, he has never shown a desire to die, on the contrary wishes to live for another century. His illness is not a question of his dignity, which in my view shatters all pro-euthanasia debate, as the individual wishes to continue living regardless of what happens. However, consent becomes a major issue when it concerns patients who have been in a vegetative state for a long time, but for cases such as the one cited by Rosenblatt in his paper involving a father killing his three year old daughter in a coma, seems groundless. (Rosenblatt, 1985) With proper medical care there could have been a possibility that the child would regain her consciousness and one must also not rule the possibility of a miracle cure. The child’s case is completely different from those patients who have been in a vegetative state for almost 40 years; as was the case with Aruna Shanbaug who slipped into a coma after being asphyxiated and sodomized by the university sweeper. The chances of her survival had been extremely bleak and hypothetically, even if such patients do regain their consciousness after such a long time, they have already reached an age that is beyond the usual life expectancy. However, the point to be noted here is that the probability is still very low and Aruna was subjected to passive euthanasia as per the law of India. (Misra, 2011) In light of the aforementioned cases and my personal observation, my stance on Euthanasia is neither for nor against it, but I believe it is justified as per the circumstances. For instance, if the chances of survival are low and the consent of the patient or their family members is taken then it may seem like a better option. Furthermore, it is not the physician’s decision to pull the plug on the patient, an argument that is further reinforced by the constitutional rights of individuals. Ignoring any one of the issue will result in a legal quagmire that will further exacerbate the issue and to formulate a proper ruling, it is important that every possible scenario is taken in to account. Works Cited Misra, Anshika. ‘Because of Aruna, no one else will have to suffer’. Hindustan Times. March 07th, 2011. Print. Peck, M. Scott . ‘Living is the Mystery’. Newsweek Magazine. March 10th, 1997. Print. Rosenblatt, Roger. ‘The quality of Mercy-killing’. Time. August, 1985. Print. Read More