Framing Euthanasia
This is an excerpt from the paper...
YouÆre watching a horror movie about a man who has been taken captive in the hospital of a mad doctor and strapped to a hospital bed. The doctor walks in, wielding a large hypodermic needle and eyes the ôpatientö diabolically. ôWeÆll be taking care of that terrible illness for you, Mr. Parker. In just a few moments, your pain will end forever.ö The camera focuses on Mr. Parker, who frantically tries to signal that he does not want to dieùthat he is not even sickùbut he is unable to speak because he has been heavily sedated. His face drenched with perspiration, his eyes darting about wildly, he makes some guttural sounds in his throat just as the doctor makes the injection. The camera goes out of focus and the screen is filled with a bright light. Mr. Parker is dead.Dramatic? Yes. Exaggerated? Yes. Unrealistic? Noànot really. Euthanasia is a concept that purports to painlessly end the lives of people who have incurable or painful diseases or handicaps. It has been framed in such a way that many people see it as mercy, a favor to someone who is suffering so much that life is not worth living. An astonishing number of people believe that euthanasia is the right thing to do in cases of terminal illness or unbearable physical or emotional pain. They persist in believing that this is merciful in spite of the fact that the suffering caused by the euthanasia can be worse than the patientÆs everyday life with the illness or handicap. This was sharply illus
. . .
e available, amounting to one in five of all reported euthanasia cases. In 22% of Dutch euthanasia cases there had been no ôexplicit requestö by the person concerned, and 50% of those subjected to this killing without consent were competent at the time of their death. The single study yet published from Belgium, where euthanasia was legalised in May 2002 showed that 30% of euthanasia cases there were non-voluntary (Davis).
Equally sobering are findings that the mentally disabled are particularly vulnerable to euthanasia decisions:
A study found that 44% of the deaths of such people living in institutions involved an ôend of life decisionö though only two of the 97 people concerned had ôexpressed a wish to dieö û a ôchoiceö which was inferred if the person pulled out a feeding tube (Davis).
One of the critical flaws in euthanasia is that the determination that a particular patient should be euthanized will always have elements of subjectivity inherent in it. HollandÆs government report in 1991 stated ôà it was gratifying to note that only one patient had non-voluntary euthanasia because there was the need for a bed.ö To call it ôgratifyingö that such a killing happened ôonlyö once shows how routine killing becomes once it is
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Davis Equally, Jim Jones, Terri Schiavo, Euthanasia YouÆre, Elderly Dutch, Noànot Euthanasia, Conclusion Death, Parker Definition, Jonesö Dutch, quality life, Introduction Mad, lives people, ôthe dieö, elderly dutch, hospital bed, people incurable painful, wish die, life adequate, feeding tube, prolonging lives, people euthanized, lives people incurable, purports painlessly lives, painful diseases handicaps, incurable painful diseases,
Approximate Word count = 1923
Approximate Pages = 8 (250 words per page)
More Essays on Framing Euthanasia
|