Arguments Against Euthanasia

Arguments Against Euthanasia:
Euthanasia devalues human life

Euthanasia can become a means of health care cost containment
Physicians and other medical care people should not be involved in directly causing death
There is a "slippery slope" effect that has occurred where euthanasia has been first been
legalized for only
the terminally ill and later laws are changed to allow it for other people or to be done
non-voluntarily.
Arguments Against Euthanasia

1.
2.
Euthanasia would not only be for people who are "terminally ill"
Euthanasia can become a means of health care cost containment
3.
Euthanasia will become non-voluntary
4. Euthanasia is a rejection of the importance and value of human life

1. Euthanasia would not only be for people who are "terminally ill." There are two problems
here -- the definition of "terminal" and the changes that have already taken place to extend
euthanasia to those who aren't "terminally ill." There are many definitions for the word
"terminal." For example, when he spoke to the National Press Club in 1992, Jack Kevorkian said
that a terminal illness was "any disease that curtails life even for a day." The co-founder of the
Hemlock Society often refers to "terminal old age." Some laws define "terminal" condition as
one from which death will occur in a "relatively short time." Others state that "terminal" means
that death is expected within six months or less.
An article in the journal, Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, described assisted suicide
guidelines for those with a hopeless condition. "Hopeless condition" was defined to include
terminal illness, severe physical or psychological pain, physical or mental debilitation or
deterioration, or a quality of life that is no longer acceptable to the individual. That means just
about anybody who has a suicidal impulse .
2. Euthanasia can become a means of health care cost containment
"...physician-assisted suicide, if it became widespread, could become a profit-enhancing tool for big HMOs. "
"...drugs used in assisted suicide cost only about $40, but that it could take $40,000 to treat a patient properly so
that they don't want the "choice" of assisted suicide..." ... Wesley J. Smith, senior fellow at the Discovery Institute.
Perhaps one of the most important developments in recent years is the increasing emphasis
placed on health care providers to contain costs. In such a climate, euthanasia certainly could
become a means of cost containment.
In the United States, thousands of people have no medical insurance; studies have shown that the
poor and minorities generally are not given access to available pain control, and managed-care
facilities are offering physicians cash bonuses if they don't provide care for patients. With greater
and greater emphasis being placed on managed care, many doctors are at financial risk when
they provide treatment for their patients. Legalized euthanasia raises the potential for a
profoundly dangerous situation in which doctors could find themselves far better off financially
if a seriously ill or disabled person "chooses" to die rather than receive long-term care.
3. Euthanasia will only be voluntary, they say Emotional and psychological pressures could
become overpowering for depressed or dependent people. If the choice of euthanasia is
considered as good as a decision to receive care, many people will feel guilty for not choosing
death. Financial considerations, added to the concern about "being a burden," could serve as
powerful forces that would lead a person to "choose" euthanasia or assisted suicide.
People for euthanasia say that voluntary euthanasia will not lead to involuntary
euthanasia. They look at things as simply black and white. In real life there would be
millions of situations each year where cases would not fall clearly into either category. Here
are two:
Example 1: an elderly person in a nursing home, who can barely understand a breakfast menu,
is asked to sign a form consenting to be killed. Is this voluntary or involuntary? Will they be
protected by the law? How? Right now the overall prohibition on killing stands in the way. Once
one signature can sign away a person's life, what can be as strong a protection as the current
absolute prohibition on direct killing? Answer: nothing.
Example 2: a woman is suffering from depresssion and asks to be helped to commit suicide. One
doctor sets up a practice to "help" such people. She and anyone who wants to die knows he will
approve any such request. He does thousands a year for $200 each. How does the law protect
people from him? Does it specify that a doctor can only approve 50 requests a year? 100? 150? If
you don't think there are such doctors, just look at recent stories of doctors and nurses who are
charged with murder for killing dozens or hundreds of patients.
Legalized euthanasia would most likely progress to the stage where people, at a certain
point, would be expected to volunteer to be killed.
4. Euthanasia is a rejection of the importance and value of human life. People who support
euthanasia often say that it is already considered permissable to take human life under some
circumstances such as self defense - but they miss the point that when one kills for self defense
they are saving innocent life - either their own or someone else's. With euthanasia no one's life is
being saved - life is only taken.
Accepting a "right to suicide" would create a legal presumption of
sanity, preventing appropriate mental health treatment.
If suicide and physician-assisted suicide become legal rights, the
presumption that people attempting suicide are deranged and in need of
physician
assisted
suicide
: suicide by a
psychological help, borne out by many studies and years of experience,
patient facilitated
would be reversed. Those seeking suicide would be legally entitled to be left
by means
(as a
alone[1] to do something irremediable, based on a distorted assessment of
drug prescription)
their circumstances, without genuine help.
or by information
(as anPersons
indicationwith mental disorders make distorted judgments.
of a lethal dosage)
provided
a
Theby
suicidal
person suffering from depression typically undergoes severe
physician
aware ofand physical strain[6]. This physical and emotional exhaustion
emotional
impairs
basic cognition[7], creates unwarranted self-blame, and generally
the patient's
intent
lowers overall self esteem[8], all of which easily lead to distorted
judgements[9]. These effects also contribute to the sense of hopelessness
that is the primary trigger of most suicidal behavior[10].
Treating "Total Pain" [4]
request for assisted Suicide is typically a cry for help. It is in reality a call for
counseling, assistance, and positive alternatives as solutions for very real problems.
2. Suicidal Intent is typically transient. Of those who attempt suicide but are stopped,
less than 4 percent go on to kill themselves in the next five years; less than 11 percent
will commit suicide over the next 35 years.
3.Terminally Ill patients who desire death are depressed and depression is treatable
In those with terminal illness. In one study, of the 24 percent of terminally ill patients
who desired death, all had clinical depression.
4. Pain is controllable. Modern medicine has the ability to control pain. A person who
seeks to kill him or herself to avoid pain does not need legalized assisted suicide but a
doctor better trained in alleviating pain.
5. In the U.S. legalizing "voluntary active euthanasia [assisting suicide] means
legalizing nonvoluntary euthanasia. State courts have ruled time and again that if
competent people have a right, the Equal Protection Clause of the United States
Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment requires that incompetent people be "given" the
same "right."
6. In the Netherlands, legalizing voluntary assisted suicide for those with terminal
illness has spread to include nonvoluntary euthanasia for many who have no
terminal illnesses. Half the killings in the Netherlands are now nonvoluntary, and the
problems for which death in now the legal "solution" include such things as mental
illness, permanent disability, and even simple old age.
7. You don't solve problems by getting rid of the people to whom the problems
happen. The more difficult but humane solution to human suffering is to address the
problems.
USA Today has reported that among older people suffering from
terminal illnesses who attempt suicide, the number suffering
from depression reaches almost 90%[3].
euthanasia \-zik, -sik\ adjective- the
act or practice of killing or permitting

the death of hopelessly sick or injured
individuals (as persons or domestic
animals) in a relatively painless way
for reasons of mercy

Arguments Against Euthanasia

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Arguments Against Euthanasia

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Arguments Against Euthanasia

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Arguments Against Euthanasia:

Euthanasia devalues human life

Arguments Against Euthanasia

Euthanasia will become non-voluntary

4. Euthanasia is a rejection of the importance and value of human life

act or practice of killing or permitting

You might also like