Making an Argument Against Euthanasia to Discourage its Legalization (Essay Sample)

Euthanasia
[Student’s Name]
[Tutor’s Name]
[Course Details]
[Date]
Outline
* Introduction
* An Overview of Euthanasia
* Prelude to the Argument
* The ills of euthanasia
* Critique of purported benefits
* Conclusion
Introduction
Euthanasia is a subject that continues to elicit ambivalent reactions from all quarters of the public domain. Most prominent among these are heated debates between the proponents and opponents of the subject as to whether or not it should be embraced as an acceptable option when circumstances seem to suggest so. A few nations across the globe have legalized euthanasia but even so, the debate over its ethical and moral acceptability has not subsided within such countries. Any time attention is drawn to this subject, it evokes deep emotions, an occurrence that can be attributed to the fact that it involves matters of life and death. However, this cannot stop discussions over the issue especially when more of the world’s nations seem to be contemplating legalizing it.
An Overview of Euthanasia
The meaning of euthanasia has changed over the years from how it was originally construed to what it means to the contemporary world. This can partly be attributed to the advancements in medical technology and the sophistication of people’s concept of life. Today, euthanasia is defined as the killing of a patient with the doctor’s full knowledge of doing so under instruction by the patient (Terry 1259). Terry further extends his definition to include the act of a physician knowingly prescribing lethal drugs to a patient at the patient’s request. However, this still fails to capture a situation where life sustaining medication or machine is withdrawn to allow a patient to die either with the patient’s consent or not, yet this too has become part of the term euthanasia (Sanson et al. 6). The two different approaches to euthanasia can both be classified into active versus inactive and voluntary versus involuntary as illustrated by Sanson et al. in the table on page 6. The motive and the outcome however remain the same because the end result is a premature death for the patient as intended when the exercise is undertaken.
Prelude to the Argument
The proponents of euthanasia have advanced several reasons which make them vouch for its legalization or rather its moral acceptance. Some of these reasons seem reasonable enough but are completely discredited by the fact that the conscious termination of life is involved. For as long as euthanasia is generally unaccepted worldwide, debates will continue to rage on with proponents of euthanasia trying to persuade their opponents to a golden mean over the issue. However, there is no way of coating the issue to make it attractive due to the ills it promises to deliver to a populace that embraces it. The focus of this research paper is to illuminate the ills of euthanasia with an aim of portraying it as a horrendous undertaking that should not even be contemplated by man.
The Ills of Euthanasia
Euthanasia is a completely undesirable undertaking that although some advocate for, they seem to be doing so from an amoral perspective as this is the only that it could appeal to them as rational human beings. Perhaps examining the ills of euthanasia carefully may give an insight into the reasons for their position. The following are therefore some of the ills of euthanasia.
* Detrimental to Effect the Medical Profession
The medical profession finds the essence of its existence in the preservation of life. The oath taken by medical practitioners at the end of training or right before practice serves to add to the fact that medical practitioners have a duty of preserving and propagating life to humanity. It is worrying when for example a doctor who is a proponent of euthanasia is quoted to say that conducting euthanasia gives him a feeling of the ‘executioner’ (Emanuel 636). In addition, some doctors who illegally engaged in the activity did not show any remorse over the issue, they instead add that they would do the same given the same circumstances (Emanuel 636). This same undertaking was reported to cause emotional burdens to the extent of altering the practice patterns of some doctors (Emanuel 636). If this kind of scenario is left unchecked, it can only be imagined what the state of the medical field would look like. To society, a doctor symbolizes the preservation and continuity of life. If charged with the task of administering the lethal medication or prescribing it, how society perceives them will change. To make matters worse, their training will have to include life termination aspects which undermines the essence of the profession. This makes euthanasia a dangerous undertaking for the medical field.
* Premature Euthanasia
It is claimed within the pro-euthanasia circles that it is only an option of last resort pursued when all other avenues have been exhausted. This assertion may seem appealing in some circumstances but this should not blindfold those who don’t welcome the idea because it has been reported elsewhere that euthanasia, in some cases, is employed before all palliative care options are explored. Studies indicate that in the Netherlands and United states, many patients who received euthanasia did so before all the palliative care options were utilized (Emanuel 639). In the Netherlands, up to 9% nursing home patients suffered this fate while in the United States up to 39% of patients with psychological disorder suffered the same fate (Emanuel 639). Chances are high that these patients never gave their consents before the exercise. What makes the matter worse is that research indicates that 65-75% of physicians falsify the cause of death as being natural after performing euthanasia in the Netherlands (Jochemsen 214). Under such circumstances, one is left wondering how many people really die naturally because if the person entrusted with the preservation of life terminates it and falsifies the outcome of the autopsy, then it becomes difficult to trust them anymore. These examples again point to the fact that euthanasia is not good for mankind.
* Undermining the Sanctity of Life
The sanctity of life has always elicited emotional arguments whenever an issue is raised over it because many people approach such arguments from a religious perspective. This perspective though refuted by atheists and pagans mostly, seems to be the only perspective from which one can make sense of life. The sad thing is that when an innocent life is taken, whether with or without the patient’s consent, proponents claim that the patient has exercised autonomy on the choice of whether to live or die. This greatly undermines the value that is attached to life and by so doing, refutes the teachings of Judeo-Christian traditions (Terry 1261). Teachings of which, refuting is tantamount to refuting the existence of God who is the author of life the only one who has authority over it. No individual has authority over their own lives let ...