Legalizing Euthanasia in the U.S.
This paper will argue in favor of legalizing
This is an excerpt from the paper...
This paper will argue in favor of legalizing euthanasia in the United States. There are two basic types of euthanasia. The first, known as passive euthanasia, involves the withholding of medical treatment. With passive euthanasia, the terminally ill patient is simply allowed to die. The second type, known as active euthanasia, occurs when a doctor or other health care practitioner takes active steps toward terminating the patient's life. With active euthanasia, the doctor might give a lethal injection or use other means to kill the patient. In certain cases, passive euthanasia is legally accepted in the United States. However, at the present time, active euthanasia is never accepted. The American Medical Association takes the point of view that passive euthanasia is sometimes acceptable. Specifically, the AMA considers the practice ethical if: "(1) the life of the body is being preserved by extraordinary means, (2) there is irrefutable evidence that biological death is imminent, and (3) the patient and/or the family consents" (Beauchamp and Childress, 1989, p. 86). By contrast, the official position of the AMA is strictly opposed to the idea of active euthanasia. Although there are cases in which a doctor may agree to withhold treatment, it is felt that "it is never permissible to take direct action to kill the patient" (Rachels, 1989, p. 78). The legal profession in the United States takes a similar view to that which is expressed by the AMA. Thus, the Su
. . .
nimal. Young notes that there are various degrees to which a doctor can help a terminally ill patient to die. For example, the doctor can provide information regarding ways in which the patient can end his or her own life. Another way a doctor can assist in a patient's death is by providing lethal drugs which can be self-administered. The highest level of doctor involvement in active euthanasia takes place when the doctor actually helps the patient carry out the act. Young's view is "that encouragement or the provision of information ought not to be subject to legal penalties, that helping someone to accomplish his own death or actually to kill him (at his request) ought to be subject to legal penalties of a lesser kind" (Young, 1989, p. 121). Other experts in the field believe that there should be no penalties for doctors who perform active euthanasia in accordance with the patient's wishes.
Although there are many advocates of legalized euthanasia, there are also many people who are opposed to the practice. In fact, some people are opposed to both the passive and active forms of euthanasia. These opponents point out that the Hippocratic Oath which all doctors take requires that they try to save patients' lives rather t
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Elizabeth Ogg, Supreme Court, University Hospital, Hippocratic Oath, Beauchamp Childress, According Rachels, , James Childress, Specifically AMA, passive euthanasia, University Utah, active euthanasia, terminally ill, ill patients, terminally ill patients, ill patient, terminally ill patient, legalized euthanasia, euthanasia passive euthanasia, childress 1989, people opposed, active passive, patient die, belkin 1989 a25, subject legal penalties,
Approximate Word count = 1732
Approximate Pages = 7 (250 words per page)
|