Legalizing euthanasia or assisted suicide:
Having personal autonomy in end-of-life decision making does not mean that family members and friends will not feel guilt, anger or bitterness The process of medical research to find cures for diseases may be threatened. Many of the German doctors who participated in the T4 euthanasia programme did so initially for reasons of compassion.
There are fears that hospice and palliative care programmes will be a casualty of legalised EAS. In the Netherlands voluntary euthanasia has led to non-voluntary euthanasia.
Just as one of the slogans used by abortion activists says 'If you don't want an abortion, don't have one'. In other words, those who don't want assisted suicide won't be effected, so what's the problem?
No man is an island, Entire of itself. Each is a piece of the continent, A part of the main.
If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less. As well as if a promontory were. As well as if a manner of thine own Or of thine friend's were. Each man's death diminishes me, For I am involved in mankind.
Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls, It tolls for thee. Why Euthanasia Should Not be Legalised: We are not free to do things which limit or violate the reasonable freedoms of others. No man is an island. No person makes the decision to end his or her life in isolation.
There are others who are affected: Western society no longer recognises suicide as a crime, but still appreciates that a person's decision to take his or her own life can have profound, often lifelong effects on the lives of others.
There may be guilt, anger or bitterness felt by those left behind. Personal autonomy is never absolute. The effect of personal decisions on others now living or in future generations must also be considered.
Dr Saunders points out that "Medical research is essential if medicine is to advance further," and goes on to say: Whatever proportions these crimes finally assumed, it became evident to all who investigated them that they had started from small beginnings.
The beginnings at first were merely a subtle shift in emphasis in the basic attitude of the physicians. It started with the acceptance of the attitude, basic in the euthanasia movement, that there is such a thing as life not worthy to be lived.
This attitude in its early stages concerned itself merely with the severely and chronically sick. Gradually the sphere of those to be included in this category was enlarged to encompass the socially unproductive, the ideologically unwanted, the racially unwanted and finally all non-Germans.
But it is important to realize that the infinitely small wedged-in lever from which this entire trend of mind received its impetus was the attitude toward the non-rehabilitable sick.
It is, therefore, this subtle shift in emphasis of the physicians' attitude that one must thoroughly investigate. It is a recent significant trend in medicine, including psychiatry, to regard prevention as more important than cure.
Observation and recognition of early signs and symptoms have become the basis for prevention of further advance of disease. In doing so they ignore historical record.
Many of the German doctors who participated in the T4 euthanasia programme did so for reasons of compassion for the mentally and physically handicapped.
Compassion Dr Karl Brandt was appointed by Hilter to head the bureaucracy and implement the infanticide programme. At his trial after the war he defended his actions saying: Nor did I feel it in any way to be unethical or immoral I am convinced that if Hippocrates were alive today he would change the wording of his oath I have a perfectly clear conscience about the part I played in the affair.
I am perfectly conscious that when I said yes to euthanasia I did so with the greatest conviction, just as it is my conviction today that it is right.
Hospice and palliative care Hospice teaches that a request for suicide by a patient means that a need exists that is not being met. As the history of the hospice movement demonstrates, once such unmet needs are fulfilled, suicidal desires often disappear.
In testimony given before the British House of Lords, Zbigniew Zylicz, one of the few palliative care experts in the Netherlands, attributed Dutch deficiencies in palliative care to the easier alternative of euthanasia.Euthanasia or assisted suicide—and sometimes both—have been legalized in a small number of countries and states.
In all jurisdictions, laws and safeguards were put in place to prevent abuse and misuse of these practices. Prevention measures have included, among others, explicit consent by the. The Impact of Euthanasia on Society Legalising euthanasia and/or assisted suicide will have a great impact on society and will affect everyone in one way or another.
Having personal autonomy in end-of-life decision making does not mean that family members and friends will not feel guilt, anger or bitterness. The Negative Effects of Euthanasia. but his fight resulted in the legalization of euthanasia in four states in the United States.
Oregon being the first, and as stated by Greg Botelho, the. Background: Euthanasia remains controversial in Canada and an issue of debate among physicians. Most studies have explored the opinion of health professionals regarding its . The Impact of Euthanasia on Families Dr. Brian Pollard Reprint with permission Since the family is the traditional place where life begins and is nurtured, euthanasia is another addition to a growing list of social proposals which would undermine the just rights of every person.
Therefore, persons who advocate the legalization of euthanasia say it will maximize good consequences for society as a whole by enhancing the concept of respect for the autonomous decisions of dying patients, promoting trust in doctors treating terminally ill patients, and creating cost-effective medicine for end-of-life situations.