Cassidy Hancock
Research Paper
Prof McLore
1 November 2017
Euthanasia
In America, we have not only the moral obligation, but the right to euthanize our beloved pets when we realize that they’re suffering or in pain. But, when it comes to our loved ones we are limited to providing the same option even when they come to the point where they have no quality of life. After extensively researching an abundance of articles and laws regarding the debate on Euthanasia, I was able to more than strongly support my view on the subject. Among reading these articles, the main subtopics of Euthanasia I found myself to focus on were the questions of, “Should euthanasia be practiced on more than just terminally ill people, such as the mentally ill”,“Should we have the right to asses whether or not a life is still worth living” and “Is mercy killing humane?”. To answer all of these questions, “Yes”.
Firstly, the term Euthanasia comes from the greek language meaning “good death”. This is the practice of ending ones life to allow them to escape an incurable disease or intolerable suffering. This medical procedure is only entirely legal in 5 states, and deliberated in 1. These States include Washington DC, California, Colorado, Oregon, Vermont, and Montana is where only special cases are allowed. This want or more so need for legality has been a battled with legislatures for years on end. But it is a topic that always comes to the surface time and time again. The phenomena dates back to 1906, when the first bill to legalize Euthanasia in American was introduced in the Ohio legislature. Or more so recently I came across a story from a man suffering with Parkinson’s disease. This man, Booth Gardner, was a former Washington governor. He came to the surface when he was campaigning for initiative 1000, “Death with Dignity”. Gardner wanted this initiative to be put on a ballot in November of 2008 in Washington. To go more in depth this “Dignity to Die” would allow a doctor to prescribe a patient a lethal dose of narcotics to terminally ill patients who wanted to end their lives. Gardner decides to become so persistent to see a change when he realized he had no power over his own incurable disease. Gardner finally gives the heart wrenching statement of saying, “If I can do anything to help people get through their final months, this is worth doing”. This man who was fighting his own disease and battle was standing up for people who couldn’t stand up for themselves. He took all his power and knowledge to fight for a law that wouldn’t even make him eligible to end his own life. This is where the question of, “Should euthanasia be practiced on more than just terminally ill people, such as the mentally ill”. It all comes down to the fact that if someone is diagnosed with a disease or a form of illness that’s entirely going to eventually take away their quality of life, they should be given the option of Euthanasia.
Secondly I came across an article by two authors, Chan and Lien who express their views on how medical costs are a reason why a patient should be given the option of Euthanasia. When you are ultimately diagnosed with a terminal or incurable disease your day to day living costs soon skyrocket. Most of the time these costs are to numb you of the pain of the disease or to just keep you alive disregarding any quality of life. Chan and Lien also believe in restrictions of this option, as do I. These being such as people who cant afford to treat or control whatever illness they may be living with. Or even when there’s a patient who undergoing intense suffering that Euthanasia should be considered as an option. The biggest thing in this article that sparked my interest was the information presented in their “theoretical model”. This showing the medical costs for caring for a patient compared to Euthanasia and which sort of patients would benefit from either or. Chan and Lien finally tie this together by stating that, “If more money were to be spent trying to help these suffering patients, than less people would have to look to Euthanasia as an option”. I believe that this way of creating two perspectives on the subject of Euthanasia really brightens the eyes of people who really need this as an option, versus patients who don’t.
The longest and most information filled piece of literature I came across was an essay written by Kenneth Cauthen. Half of his essay was for Euthanasia, and half was against it. This genuinely giving myself a sense of how I really felt on the matter. This is where I found myself asking the question of, “Should we have the right to asses whether or not a life is still worth living”. Euthanasia is somewhat a breaking point of when it comes to the normal rules of mortality. The author breaks his arguments into four parts. First beginning with the situations when the patient makes the choice of wanting to end their own life even after considering other factors. This being when a patient is at a point of no return, meaning they cannot bare to have anymore pain, indignity, torment, and despair. This followed by part two where the role of the physician comes into play. Most doctors are supposed to enhance or save lives, not end it intentionally. When digging deeper you soon question if the doctor actually wants the best for their patient, even if it is comes to the point of ending someone life when there’s nothing more you can really do. This then leads to part three, that sometimes ending ones suffering takes priority over extending a life that has no quality left. This is where assessing the value of ones life comes into play. It makes you question the conflict between looking at life as a precious gift, and seeing a life that is no longer worth living when full of incurable or intolerable suffering.
In the next steps of Kenneth Cauthen’s essay, he even asks the question of, “Is mercy killing humane”. The author states in this fourth part of being for Euthanasia, “When death becomes preferable to life, everyone would benefit if it were legal to show mercy”. This becomes one of his most lengthy parts of his pros. This statement coming from a man who is a theologian, a philosopher, an ethicist, and a Baptist minister who holds his morals to a high standard. One argument that really opens peoples eyes comes from families who tell stories about how they had to watch their loved one die in absolute agony and felt helpless about it. With Euthanasia, we can take this aspect of not only taking away watching a love one brutally suffer and pass on, but having them pass peacefully instead of in an awful way. Allowing Euthanasia to be legal would take away the awful acts of people hanging or shooting themselves to escape the suffering they are facing. Or even take away the suffering patients having to ask their brother, husband or daughter to aim the gun or suffocate them with their own pillow. This then forcing good people to take this extreme measure of trying to help their family member or patient. Then having to cover it up to protect themselves when all they were doing was helping someone and finally giving them the relief they felt they deserved. Obviously there comes a time where killing someone is absolutely without a doubt, wrong. But when if comes to a terminally ill patient, someone suffering with no cure, or someone mentally ill who has no quality of life left, Euthanasia is humane. Cauthen states, “We can provide an opportunity for patients in certain extreme and rare cases under strictly regulated conditions to manage their dying without endangering our reverence for life. In so doing we can provide a way to be merciful to the dying with branding those who show mercy as criminals.” That statement is was entirely made me be pro Euthanasia.
As Kenneth Cauthen did write a fourteen page essay, I came across a section where he compared letting death happen to causing it. This being another large controversy when it comes to the topic of Euthanasia. This relating to an almost obvious topic of discussion when it comes to religion or more so the opinion of one person to the next. Are we supposed to let a higher power determine when we should pass on, or can it be up to ourselves? Are you going to let your loved one suffer for the rest of their lives or would you rather not see them be in an awful state? And not to mention sure there are many situations where someone is in the position where they could get better, but what about the people who can’t? That is when I believe we should be allowed to have the right to end our lives when we know it’s the right time. Or even give our family members the power to make this decision when we are in such an awful state that we can’t even speak for ourselves. I always to come back with the statement of saying that Euthanasia should be given legality but, shouldn’t be something that is abused.
Cauthen also presents examples on how this could go one way or another. The author gives the example of when an infant or child is born with many life threatening defects that would entirely take away from any quality of life. Should the parents be given the option to do what they think is best and medically kill their child? Obviously that is a drastically hard decision to make but, would you want to watch your child severely suffer everyday? I certainly wouldn’t. This idea of euthanasia is often presented in the idea of elderly on their way to passing or adults with severe forms of cancer or illness. This subject is spared away from the idea of children having this medical treatment done on them, but is defiantly a contribution to the subject.