Euthanasia And Mercy Killing

Medicine
5 min, 0 sec read Download Article

Introduction

The term Euthanasia originated from Greek and means ‘good death.' It is a medical practice that encompasses intentionally ending a patient's life through administering lethal doses or withdrawing important medication from a patient's required dosage. The aim of euthanasia is to end suffering and pain especially in patients who suffer from chronic, incurable illnesses. Since its legalization, euthanasia has been subject to controversy. While a majority of countries around the world still oppose this medical practice, some medical practitioner perceive it as a means through which patients can be given a dignified sendoff instead of letting them suffer in pain. Euthanasia was first legalized in the Netherlands in 2002. In the same year, Belgium followed suit in making this controversial medical practice legal. The Netherlands extended the euthanasia law to minors above the age of 12, a move that sparked worldwide outrage. In 2014, Belgium also extended its euthanasia laws to cover minors older than 12 years and had the capacity for discernment. The extension of the law to minors has received a lot of backlash from pro-life activists and nations that are anti-euthanasia. In the United States, a majority of states consider Euthanasia an illegal medical practice. However, the states of Vermont, Washington D.C, Oregon and Colorado and California are the only places where the practice is legal. In the United States, the practice has not been extended to include minors.

Critics of euthanasia argue that the practice is by large a violation of the right to life, a universal human right. Additionally, scholars have argued that most patients choose euthanasia not for themselves but the sake of their families. Sensitivity and pressure play a key role in the choice of euthanasia amongst patients with many not wanting their families to undergo the financial and emotional strains of having to watch them suffer. Euthanasia, as argued by some scholars is a slippery slope that is likely to come with a ton of negative consequences in the society. Expanding the law of euthanasia to apply to minors is a violation of the law itself which emphasizes on competence and discernment which many believe 12 years old are incapable of. Pro-euthanasia activists argue that the medical practice allows patients to die with dignity and saves their families and friends from having to watch them suffer. They perceive it as a way out of pain and suffering caused by chronic health conditions. Supporters of this medical practice argue by the principle of patient autonomy as well as the patient's right to die a dignified and peaceful death.

 Review of Literature

Euthanasia is a complex and sensitive issue for both minors and adults. Bovens (2015) argues that decisions for euthanasia by patients are often prompted by pressure and sensitivity of the patients. This pressure may have a greater effect on minors than adults making euthanasia a weighty issue amongst minors than adults. When patients feel they are a burden to their families, they may opt for euthanasia to end the financial strains and emotional struggles that their families go through in watching them suffer. Their choice of euthanasia will, therefore, be more focused towards their families and friends than themselves.

 Cuman and Gastmans (2017) further support this by emphasizing on the relationship between the vulnerability of the patients and the pressure and sensitivity that comes with their conditions. Cumans and Gastmans highlight the tendency of the patient to be more inclined towards euthanasia because of the suffering they seem to be causing their families. Their autonomous decision-making process is not based on what is best for them but rather on what is best for their families. Legalizing euthanasia according to Bovens ( 2015) makes it a readily available alternative that patients can easily opt for instead of fighting for their health or opting for palliative care.

The alternative to euthanasia is palliative care (Sharma, 2013). This type of care offers relief from distressing symptoms and pain Palliative care is creative, active and compassionate to the patient's needs. It aims to alleviate pain and make patients as comfortable as they can be. Hahn (2012) argues that death is not a part of palliative care. Instead of curing the patients, it harms them. Life is a primary and substantial benefit. It's therefore impossible to benefit when life is lost. Death in this connection is not of any benefit to a patient.

Unguru (2012) adopts an anti-euthanasia perception that highlights the practice as a violation of the right to life. He argues that the legalization of this practice has led to the loss of lives that would have otherwise have been preserved under palliative care. His argument further supports the notion that palliative care allows patients to live longer under favorable conditions and prevents them from choosing euthanasia to cut short their lives immaturely.

The principle of patient autonomy has constantly been used in support of euthanasia.  Karlsson, Milberg & Strang (2011) emphasize that based on this principle, a patient has the right to make a decision concerning what they deem is best for them. While adults have the capability to make autonomous decisions, these scholars argue that the same does not apply to minors.

The argument on whether or not minors are capable of making autonomous decisions has been argued over and again by medical practitioners and scholars. Chong & Fok (2009) maintain that age acts as an important pointer as far as patient autonomy is concerned. In this connection, minors above the age of 12 are regarded incapable of making their own choices. Chong and Fok claim that minors are easily influenced by external forces, and therefore their decisions are not a reflection of their choices but rather those of the people around them.

Unguru (2012) holds to the notion that minors above the age of 12 are incapable of understanding the consequences of their actions. The weightiness of euthanasia is incomprehensible to minors. Unguru goes ahead to state that since minors are not allowed to participate in weighty issues like politics, or buying alcohol and cigarettes, they shouldn't have a say in something as weighty and complex as euthanasia.

Share this post:

Cite this Page

APA 7
MLA 9
Harvard
Chicago

GradShark (2023). Euthanasia and Mercy Killing. GradShark. https://gradshark.com/example/euthanasia-and-mercy-killing

Finding it challenging to complete your essay within the given deadlines?