EUTHANASIA

Short and Long term Effects
(political, economic, social)

Social-

§      Abuse and neglect might become more common if euthanasia is part of society.

§      People may feel obligated to end their life sooner if they contract a disease.

§      Someone could use euthanasia as an excuse to end their life, even though they may not be in pain.

§      The elderly, people of not “sound mind”, and people with disabilities may be discriminated in society. ( For example, being forced or influenced to end their life earlier).

§      However, there are many social implications

§      It is a controversial issue, where people on both sides of the debate feel their approach is the most humane.

Economically->

§       Keeping people alive who no longer have a quality life and wish to die: Costs the government money.

§       ( and tax payers)

§       They take up hospital beds, use life support machines and require medical assistance.

§       There are already financial pressures when it comes to health care.

§       These pressures will  continue to  multiply with the coming years as our population grows.

§       The Canadian Court Systems are also effected economically.

   Politically->

§       Under Canadian Law euthanasia is illegal.

§       The debate over legalizing euthanasia has been debated in Canada for years.

§       Euthanasia is legal in the Netherlands and Oregon, USA.       Long term effect->

§       If legalized people experiencing destructible pain can end their suffering.

§       Short term effectsà

§       The family members of the deceased become emotionally unstable. It is a hard and trying experience when a plug is pulled on a loved one, and they question afterwards if there still might of been hope.

§       There are many short term emotional effects that Euthanasia causes.

 

Euthanasia an Overview

§       The word Euthanasia originated from the Greek language: eu means "good" and thanatos means "death".

§       Passive Euthanasia:

§       Hastening the death of a person by altering some form of support and letting nature take its course.

§       For example:  

§       Removing life support equipment (e.g. turning off a respirator)

§       Stopping medical procedures, medications etc.,

§       Active Euthanasia:

§       This involves causing the death of a person through a direct action, in response to a request from that person.

§       A well known example was the mercy killing in 1998 of a patient with ALS (Lou Gehrig's Disease) by Dr. Jack Kevorkian, a Michigan physician.

Euthanasia Continued

§       Physician Assisted Suicide:

§       A physician supplies information and/or the means of committing suicide (e.g. a prescription for lethal dose of sleeping pills, or a supply of carbon monoxide gas) to a person, so that they can easily terminate their own life.

§       The term "voluntary passive euthanasia" is becoming commonly used. 

§       Dr. Kevorkian, who has promoted this type of euthanasia and assisted at the deaths of hundreds of patients.

§       Involuntary Euthanasia:

§       This term is used by some to describe the killing of a person who has not explicitly requested aid in dying. They will probably never obtain consciousness .

§       It violates one's natural desire to live.

§       It harms other people.

 

Ethical Aspects of Euthanasia
Is Euthanasia Ethical?

§       Who is to say that you cannot end your life if you are terminally ill?

§       Some terminally ill patients are in intractable pain and/or experience an intolerably poor quality of life. They would prefer to end their life rather than continue until their body finally gives up.

§       Should terminally ill people be given the right to commit suicide?

§       Suicide is a legal act that is theoretically available to all. But a person who is terminally ill or who is in a hospital setting or is disabled may not be able to exercise this option - either because of mental or physical limitations. In effect, they are being discriminated against because of their disability. ·

§       On the other side, people believe that because they are not of “sound mind” therefore they cannot make this vital decision.  

Should the personal beliefs of some religious followers decide public policy in regards to Euthanasia ?         

§       “Many faith groups believe that human suffering can have a positive value for the terminally ill person and for caregivers.

§       On the other side, people feel that religious beliefs should not have any effect on the laws of society. Public policy should be purely based on ethical decisions

§       Who is to say what a tolerable level of pain is?

§       Many people argue that pain experienced by terminally ill people can be controlled to tolerable levels through proper management.

§       They conclude that there is no need for physician assisted suicide.

§       On the other side, people believe that if you are suffering from terminal pain if you wish to dies, you should be granted that wish.

 

Ethical Aspects of Euthanasia

§       If Euthanasia is legalized in Canada will people feel pressure to die?

§       By making assisted suicide and/or euthanasia available, some people will be pressured into accepting assistance in dying by their families.

§       People may be influenced by other people and feel that they should commit suicide.

§       Is it ethical to engage in extremely expensive treatment of terminally ill people in order to extend their lives by a few weeks?

§       The money used in this way is not available for pre-natal care, infant care, etc. where it would save lives, and significantly improve the long-term quality of life for others.

 

Religious Views on Euthanasia

§       Catholics  believe euthanasia is morally wrong because it is the destruction of life.

§       Say “yes” to life– from the first moment of conception until last natural breath.

§       Christians believe that they were created by god therefore they should stick to God’s chosen plan for them.

 

§      Jewish views on Euthanasia

§       Forbids anything that might shorten life

§       However, doctors are not required to let the dying process last longer then it normally would..

 

§      Sikhs view on euthanasia

§       Believe that life is a gift of God.

§       The timing of birth and death should be left in God's hands.

§       The Sikh Gurus rejected suicide (euthanasia) as an interference in God's plan.

§       Believe that suffering is due to karma. They should accept this and make the best out of life in terms of the karma given to them.

 

§      Hindu views on euthanasia

§       “Most Hindus would say that a doctor should not accept a patient's request for euthanasia since this will cause the soul and body to be separated at an unnatural time.”

§       The result will damage the karma of both doctor and patient.

§       Euthanasia goes against the belief of ahimsa. However, some Hindus believe that ending someone’s life that is suffering from agonizing pain is morally accepted.

§      Buddhist views on Euthanasia

§       are against involuntary euthanasia. Unclear view on voluntary Euthanasia

 

§      Islamic views on Euthanasia

§       Muslims are against euthanasia.

§       “They believe that all human life is sacred because it is given by Allah, and that Allah chooses how long each person will live. Human beings should not interfere in this.”

 

The Law and Euthanasia

§       Should the law regarding Euthanasia in Canada be changed?

§       Should Voluntary Euthanasia be Legalized?

§       On one sideà

§       Deter people from advancing their own ends by aiding or abetting clinically depressed individuals, and those of lower intelligence.

§       Some people believe that those who are terminally ill or suffering from severe mental and/or physical damage should be allowed to die instead of being kept alive by machines.

§       People should be allowed to make decisions for others who are suffering and cannot express their own wishes.

§       Conclusion: Supporters of Euthanasia believe that life should be free of pain and that human dignity should be preserved.

§       On the other sideà

§       Could cause harm

§       If pain management is required, then it should be available even if it does nothing to prolong life.

§       Law should protect people who are mentally unsound, who cannot consent to euthanasia.

 

·         Would Legalizing Euthanasia lead to involuntary killing?

Should Physicians Assist in Suicide?

·         Would Legalizing Euthanasia lead to involuntary killing?

§       People argue that if physician-assisted suicide becomes legal, it will inevitably be used by the government to eliminate individuals whose live seem burdensome or without value.

§       For example, in Nazi Germany Hitler decided in September 1939, that because of the desperate need for hospital beds to accommodate war causalities, a euthanasia program was undertaken.

§       This open numerous hospital bed for the war wounded. Is this ethical?

§       Sometimes it is troublesome, and financially burdening for families to care for elders, the sick, and the severely disabled. In result of this people may choose euthanasia as a option for their troubles.

§       On the other side

§       Legalizing euthanasia would not be abused by the Canadian government because Canadians would not allow it.

§       In the Netherlands, physicians have been practicing euthanasia.

§       If their society is highly civilized, liberal, and a humane nation this shows that legalizing euthanasia will not lead to involuntary killing.

§       Should Physicians Assist in Suicide?

§       On one side

§       If the patient requests it, assisted suicide is an act of compassion and benevolence.

§       Sometimes in extreme circumstances, the best thing a physician can do is help someone die in order to relieve intolerable, unnecessary suffering that makes life unbearable as judged by the patient.

§       Sometimes ending suffering takes priority over extending life

§       On the other side

§       Hippocratic Oath  forbids physicians from practicing assisted suicide.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Work’s Cited

§       Torr D. James, ed. Euthanasia Opposing Viewpoints.

§            California: Greenhaven Press, 2000.

§       Somerville, Margaret. Death Talk The Case against Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide. Canada: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2001.

§       Hawkins N. Gail, ed. Physician Assisted Suicide.

§            California: Greenhaven Press, 2002.

§       Prado G. C.,ed. Assisted Suicide Canadian Perspectives.

§            Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press, 2000.

§       Donnelly, John, ed. Suicide Second Edition Right or Wrong?

§            New York: Prometheus Books, 1998.

§       McCuen E. Gary. Doctor Assisted Suicide and the Euthanasia Movement.

§            United States of America: Gary E. McCuen Publications, Inc., 1999.

§       Euthanasia.com. Information for Research on Euthanasia, Physician-Assisted Suicide,Living Wills, Mercy Killing. http://www.euthanasia.com/. ( 15 April 2005)

§       Robinson, B. A. Euthanasia And Physician Assited Suicide. http://www.religioustolerance.org/euthanas.htm. ( 13 April 2005)

§       Cundiff, David. Euthanasia Is Not the Answer: A Hospice Physician's View.

      U.S.A: Humana Press , 1992.