Euthanasia: Allow Them to Be Free From Body

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Euthanasia: Allow them to be free from body
Conclusion
Works Cited

Introduction

Euthanasia has been contemned by many persons as well as organizations while others feel people must be given the choice for their death. One of the overwhelming questions regarding the practice has been whether euthanasia is good or bad. Same Sex marriage is another concept which has caused serious debate. While people who are orthodox in their thinking denounce this practice, there is a good amount of people, free and liberal in their thinking, who supports the right of people who choose same sex marriage. Similarly, the question of preserving wilderness at the cost of new housing has been a topic for somber dispute.

At a time when housing has raised serious issues just as the issue of preserving wilderness, the question often asked is if it is justifiable to preserve wilderness at the expense of new housing. The practice of abortion has caused serious debate as a group of people have demonstrated their protest against it while there have been also people who support the practice. Cloning is an issue which still stirs up important questions concerning the morality of man and the debate relating to the issue will remain for a long time.

Euthanasia: Allow them to be free from body

Euthanasia, the practice of deliberately bring about an easy, painless, and moderate death to a person who is in the last days of his life and can no more bear the pain of living, has been disagreed by several people and groups who consider the practice as immoral. While some people consider it as a murderous behavior, there have been educated and thinking people who regard it as an act of mercy and generosity.

The freedom of every individual to live is well recognized and it is of course an appreciable factor. However, it is a misfortune that human beings are not given the right to die according to their wish, especially at a time when living is no more possible. Life is a invaluable gift, I don’t question it. But, it becomes life only when one is able to ‘live’ it and not when he ‘suffers’ it. The pitiable situation of the people who are disabled of living needs to provoke serious reflections to people who are learned and civilized. To be specific, the practice of euthanasia is greatly welcomed by people who are facing the final stages of life, due to physical and mental disability.

It is in agreeing with their wish to live no more that one responds to the rights of the people and not in making them suffer for the final hours of life. In certain cases of human disability, the person suffering, people immediately close to him/her feel that the most recommendable decision for the affected person is the provision for the ultimate choice between life and death. Therefore, it is apparent that euthanasia offers the best way for the person to relieve extreme pain and it also gives a way of respite once a person’s superiority of life is low.

Any attempt to contest the practice of euthanasia, therefore, will be inhuman, heartless and iniquitous. Dr. Meenaz M was referring to the same fact when she remarked, “Legalizing euthanasia would help alleviate suffering of terminally ill patients. It would be inhuman and unfair to make them go through the unbearable pain. Individuals with incurable diseases or the one’s where effective cure wouldn’t do enough good to their quality of life should be given the liberty to induced death… Similarly, the motive of euthanasia is to ‘aid-in-dying’ painlessly and thus should be considered and accepted by law.” (Meenaz). In this background, the legalizing of euthanasia is the need of the day.

The main disputes that are placed against the establishment of the practice concerns with the ethical question which states that nobody has a right over his or other person’s life. However, based on the same ethical grounds for beneficent euthanasia considering the service rendered to the people who suffer with incurable diseases by the practice of euthanasia. Realizing this special nature of the practice, many distinguished personalities of the world, including Nobel Prize laureates, physicians, philosophers, religious leaders, and others have strongly backed up the practice and several pleas have been made to legalize euthanasia.

In one such an important plea, some of the renowned men of the world have declared their support for the practice and according to them, “We believe that reflective ethical consciousness has developed to a point that makes it possible for societies to work out a humane policy toward death and dying. We deplore moral insensitivity and legal restrictions that impede and oppose consideration of the ethical case for euthanasia.

We appeal to an enlightened public opinion to transcend traditional taboos and to move in the direction of a compassionate view toward needless suffering in dying.” (A Plea for Beneficent Euthanasia). Therefore, there have been strong views that cling to that the lenience, recognition, or enforcement of the unnecessary suffering of others is immoral and there is a felt need for the people at large to join in the campaign for making the practice of euthanasia as legal.

Conclusion

In the ultimate conclusion, one feels the need for a public motion in favor of euthanasia; it is not only a humanitarian activity to the suffering individuals but a help to the entire humanity as well.

Works Cited

Meenaz, M Dr. Pros and Cons of Euthanasia. Buzzle. 2008. Web.

A Plea for Beneficent Euthanasia. American Humanist Association. 1974. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!

Euthanasia: Allow Them to Be Free From Body

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)