please help me with ideas for a short essay on euthanasia:?

Question

Is a dignified death more important than a legal (lawful) one?

please no answers like YES or NO :)
I need to develop thoughts. Thanks in advance

i have to put an emphasis on the choice between legal and dignified death, as I understand it....thanks anyway

btw I am a student in France so I really want to surprise my teacher with my work

and excuse me for such a weird topic

Answer 1

For whose benefit is euthanasia performed must be your first thought. If somebody is in terrible pain, or their quality of life is so poor that they are unable to get any satisfaction out of living then, if they have expressed the wish to die, one should be able to assist their death. Whilst certain countries like Switzerland and the Netherlands have made assisted suicide and euthanasia legal but with strict controls, it is forbidden in Great Britain and we have seen people like Diane Pretty slowly dying in horrendous pain and appealing in vain to the European Court of Law to allow her husband to facilitate her death since she was not able to do it herself.
We are kinder to our animals than we are to our fellow humans, and spare them suffering out of love, not to get rid of them.
Some argue that a vegetative life is better than no life at all, but the progresses made in medical aids have allowed people to live in circumstances where they would have died naturally much earlier.
One should question if there is any benefit to anyone in keeping a brain dead person on a ventilator for months or someone completely paralysed in an iron lung when they have no hope of recovery. The problem arises when the persons involved have neither the wherewithal nor the possibility to let people know what their wish would be. It should be compulsory for everybody to make a living will stating what their wishes are should they have an accident or reach a state of degeneration whereby they no longer can state their preferences.Of course there should be strict controls so that there is no abuse like bumping off Granny quietly to get hold of her savings or a doctor abusing his powers to take advantage of his patients as we have seen recently. Sadly there are always people who bend the rules for their own purposes and that is why the law is so inflexible at the moment.
Personally I would rather be dead than senile, incontinent, bedridden, suffering from an incurable disease or be in terrible pain, a burden to my family and dependent on nursing staff and machinery to be kept alive. I have seen people dying of cancer and in terrible pain despite opiates, screaming to be allowed to die, and it is beyond bearing, both for the patients and those who care for them.

Answer 2

If you ignore the religionists, who believe in things that are not provable, and only deal with the facts then you could (not must) develop a utilitarian morality - meaning that the objective of all laws should be to maximise human happiness and minimise human misery.
In this context, euthanasia would be so obviously reasonable that there wouldn't even be a debate.
So where does opposition to it come from ? From religious people, and from people who may not be religious but who are influenced by morality of religion.
Can such opposition be acceptable ? After all, religionists do in fact believe that their imaginary friend in the sky is telling them to do things.
On the other hand, a utilitarian morality would say that having intimate relations with consenting donkeys would be perfectly ok.
Maybe it is.

Answer 3

Why not firstly define euthanasia, give a dictionary definition, then possibly a legal one.
Second; Discuss when you feel that it is appropriate to allow it.
Third; Discuss the pit falls and possible misuse of it.
Fourth; Search websites for other peoples ideas on the subject.
Maybe explore the idea of living wills. For example if I am involved in a horrific accident and left in a vegetative state, I do not wish to be resuscitated, do not wish a blood transfusion, etc. Hope this helps!

Answer 4

Are we talking Humans or animals?

If Humans their are two really critical issues.

1. Who performs the process? If it is completly unassisted than it is suicide. What is the social Responsibility to prevent suicide.

If it is assisted suicide than isn't it murder. Someone else participating in suicide that person is contributing and is therefore an accomplice to a crime? Aren't they.

The other issue is one of competance. If it is assisted -who determines that the person is able to understand that they want to die. The classic example is the coma patient. Soem would say after some time that the are dead but everyone once in a while people just wake up from many years of coma.

There is a lot more here - maybe search social issues of assisted suicide.

Answer 5

its a moral question. god fearing folk think its blasphemous to take a life.. regardless of pain suffering and long term debilitating illness with NO chance of a cure...

euthanasia is the lawful taking of someones life due primarily to illness or disease. cancer patients, it would appear rarely want to end it all, regardless of whether theres a cure or not. (because there might be)

early onset dementia seems to have em clamouring for the lethal injection, but one has to ask, are the reasons for seeking termination viable? (the victim knows nothing of this process) could it just be that the carer want a life themselves.. looking after grandad or nan (or mum and dad) is full time and very arduous... and lets face it, most folks have this thrust upon them... no one picks it as a career... well, not until theyve had lots of training.

morally im ambiguous.. personally, im in a wheelchair, and my grandad had alzheimers... and i dont want my kids or my wife obligated to look after what is essentially a vegetable... give me dignity... not dependency.

Answer 6

Firstly I'd say what euthanasia actually is and what types of euthanasia there are (indirect, direct, voluntary, non-voluntary and involuntary) then I'd go on talking about what other actions you could take instead of euthanasia. Then include some things from other websites and different religious views on the subject.

Answer 7

if a person is dying of an illness that is going to take away their dignity and maybe cause them severe pain i think they should have the choice if they are of sound mind, people have their pets put to sleep for kindness rather than let their animal suffer, you have the right to refuse treatment in hospital, you have the right not to be resuscitated so therefore should you not have the right to take enough medication to send you to sleep eternally peacefully. people believe god has the only right to end a life but god is a caring loving person who taught people to forgive so does this not mean he would forgive anyone in so much pain ending their misery.

Answer 8

try looking at amnesty international they have good arguments

Answer 9

what s wrong with youth in asia?