The Controversy Surrounding Euthanasia
The euthanasia subject more so the active euthanasia has elicited unending controversy as it has been marred by ambiguity and endless debate about legal and ethical issues concerning the patient and healthcare providers. Euthanasia has become a common term I medical field as people are torn between as to whether it is acceptable, should be allowed or not. However, this argument is further heightened by the fact that euthanasia comes in two active and passive. This essay provides an argumentative essay on active euthanasia. According to Keown (395), active euthanasia occurs when medical personnel's or any other individual knowingly do something that causes a patient to die. People think the act is somewhat an acceptable one to release the patient from pain; however, it is much unacceptable to kill a patient.
Arguments in Support of Active Euthanasia
The advocates of euthanasia have put different arguments in support of their view and stand. First, based on the point that the action gives a person route to peaceful and dignified death. In recent times, there has been an increased number of patients in need of daily care or assisted care, which in turn is leading to more finances being dedicated to catering to them. With the adoption of active euthanasia, there will be the aspect of a person dying with dignity. This would reduce suffering as well as reduce the cost incurred by the family to support the patient, while its well-known death will eventually come (Dresser 5). Dying with dignity is understood to be a kinder means of death than causing the patient to suffer and die. In addition to having an honorable death experience, the action would result in cost saving for the family. One of the major arguments in which the proponent of active euthanasia base their case on is the fact in respect of freedom of choice for every person (Autonomy). People ought to have the right to control their life and body, and in turn, should be handed ultimate power over their body and life. This, in turn, holds only if a person doesn't violate another's right.
Arguments Against Active Euthanasia
However, the use of active euthanasia has received publicized discrimination as its opponents label it an illegal undertaking, and lack of respect for human life. One of the major points against the practice of active euthanasia is that almost all religious argument on this issue, it doesn't provide any justification on why another person other than Supreme Being, in this case, God, has the right to end a human life. Secondly, the use of euthanasia provides a 'slippery path.' This implies that legalizing euthanasia could result in an increasing number of unintended changes in the health care system and the larger society (Nilstun 111). This implies that the majority of the people may take this as a norm, becoming an acceptable practice and in turn degrade the human life, leaving it in people's hands whether one deserves to live or not.
Alternatives to Euthanasia
Additionally, on the argument against active euthanasia, advancement in the medical field has led to the invention of alternative methods that can be deployed to take care of patients. For example, due to advances in palliative care as well as the mental health treatment, there is, in turn, no reason as to why any individual should feel to be suffering intolerably, whether mentally or physically. This, in turn, implies that, if the right care and environment are provided, then there would be no reason as to why a person cannot have painless natural death (Nilstun 111). Additionally, the legalization of euthanasia would result in a divided view with reference to human life. This is due to the fact that, it would result in weakening society's respects sanctity of life, and in turn, accepting it means sick, and disabled people's lives are worthless compared to other people. No person has a right to kill, and in turn, shouldn't be considered at all, more so the move gives doctors too much power over people's lives as well as exposing vulnerable people in the society to too much pressure to end their lives.
Conclusion
In conclusion, euthanasia has led to constant controversy as to what is the best take on the matter. However, drawing from the arguments above, it is clear that, despite wish for people to end suffering and painful death, there are alternatives to this and give people peaceful natural death. Legalizing this practice would result in numerous other related loopholes in the medical field. Maximum best care should be provided, and key death occurs naturally. Despite the supporters of the argument presenting their case, the opposing side of the practice takes a better share as to why euthanasia would be illegal.
References
Dresser, Rebecca. “On Legalizing Physician-Assisted Death for Dementia.” Hastings Center Report, vol. 47, no. 4, July 2017, pp. 5–6.
Keown, John. “Euthanasia, Ethics and Public Policy: An Argument against Legislation.” Journal of Legal Medicine, vol. 24, no. 3, Sept. 2003, p. 395.
Nilstun, Tore, et al. “Surveys on Attitudes to Active Euthanasia and the Difficulty of Drawing Normative Conclusions.” Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, vol. 28, no. 2, June 2000, p. 111.
