5 December 2013
Moral dilemmas are always conflicting choices in everyone’s life. The constant struggle between what is right and what is wrong will probably never end when it comes to legal matters. What one topic of moral/legal righteousness is, would be Euthanasia, or assisted suicide. Not just assisted suicide, but doctor assisted suicide, or mercy killing as some like to call it for a darker point. There are types of Euthanasia, the opposing view to which it is illegal, and the views that are for this practice are the topics. There are a few different types of Euthanasia, voluntary, involuntary, passive, and active. All have been accused of being wrong, and fought for to be considered just. The view that agrees with this being illegal has controlled most of the countries states and has given many reasons. The truth is the opposite, in which it should be legal, for it is morally right and legal within the confines of the law. Euthanasia is illegal in all states, except for Washington and Oregon, but it should be legalized in all states, because in many situations the most humane thing to do is to give someone the dying wish of death.
The definition of Euthanasia is the act of putting to death painlessly or allowing to die, as by withholding medical measures from a person or animal suffering from an incurable, esp. a painful, disease or condition. A.K.A physician assisted suicide; many times it is under physician care and is a humane gesture for people in excruciating pain There are four types of classifications for this, two being regular classifications and the other two being procedural classifications. The two regular classifications are voluntary and involuntary. Voluntary Euthanasia is euthanasia conducted with consent. Since 2009 voluntary euthanasia has been legal in Belgium, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Switzerland, and the states of Oregon (USA) and Washington (USA). Involuntary Euthanasia is euthanasia conducted without consent. The decision is made by another person because the patient is incapable to doing so himself/herself. Involuntary Euthanasia is legal in situations where a patient is incapacitated and the caretaker makes the decision to keep them sustained with life-support or to disconnect them and have them die. It is usually judged based on what the patient would have wanted or if the patient is a vegetable, then it goes to what the caretaker wants to do with the patient. Active Euthanasia, which is lethal substances or forces are used to end the patient's life. Active euthanasia includes life-ending actions conducted by the patient or somebody else. Passive Euthanasia is when life-sustaining treatments are withheld. The definition of passive euthanasia is often not completely clear. For example, if a doctor prescribes increasing doses of opioid analgesia (strong painkilling medications) which may eventually be toxic for the patient, some may argue whether passive euthanasia is taking place - in most cases, the doctor's measure is seen as a passive one. Many claim that the term is wrong, because euthanasia has not taken place, because there is no intention to take life.
The opposing views of Euthanasia are mostly centered around claims of it being wrong, morally and legally. Morally because it they say it is taking a life off the planet and not considering the feelings and thoughts of everyone being affected. One scenario that has been told is a patient decides to go through with Euthanasia and is still on the fence about the whole thing. The patient has the doctor ready everything needed and is injected with or given medications the will ultimately give the patient what he asked for, which is death. The patient, after congesting or being injected decides they want to live and endure the pain to fight for life, but it is too late, and the family is horrified and blames the doctor for killing their family member. The scenario shows that even though the