Euthanasia is one of the most topics that are usually discussed among people in the world on daily basis. Everyone comes up with his or her own ideas and suggestions concerning this controversial topic. Euthanasia is normally debated on social grounds and it above all else involves someone making his/her own choice, whether to continue with life or give up the hope and die. This should be a choice that people make themselves. Euthanasia is when a physician supplies the information and/or any means of ending life to patients. This can be in form of a prescription for a lethal dose of sleeping pills or in form of dangerous gases such as the supply of carbon monoxide gas. In this paper we will discusses the logic of euthanasia in the society.
The logic of euthanasiaEuthanasia is seen as philosophical. The right to death is sometimes perceived as equally significant as other values which exist in the society. Some people have a very strong belief that their right to life is an absolute value, and to live as long period of time is a very important thing in all circumstances. For them, life is treated as a valuable thing and nobody has a legal right to violate it and choose death option until nature ends the life. However, life is not an ultimate value to others. The weight of life always varies from one person to another. In other words, life is taken as a relative value and thus the right to death can be one of the options for the free citizens. The patients who are undergoing any form of permanent torture of a certain disease may willingly prefer peaceful death as opposed to extended life. It doesn't mean that every person who is suffering from terminal cancer or any other serious disease demands death. For instance, some patients wish to cut their lives short rather than to continue suffering from the illness. Due to these differences in values among the people, their choices are supposed to be respected in by other members of the society (Materstvedt L.).
The patients who suffer from some terminal illnesses such as cancer need to escape from the unbearable persistent pains that are associated with the sicknesses. These people have a right to be helped by the physicians in a practical sense in order for them to die with reasonable dignity (Paterson C. Pg 174). In 1930s, some bills on the euthanasia were made in England by Killick Millard and the effects of the bills were realized in America. Killick said, "The object of this bill is to provide for the granting of permits which will render it legal for persons who are certified to be suffering from incurable , fatal, and painful disease to receive euthanasia, if they desire, and thus to shorten the severe physical suffering entailed by certain forms of disease."(Lavi J. Pg 95-6). Under the status quo, some of the patients undergo persistent suffering from the pains. In the cases of terminal cancer, when cancer cells reach the human body bones, they continue to damage the bone tissues and cause throbbing pain. The existing painkillers sometimes work, yet they are not efficient and perfect. Not all cancer patients can have the pains in their bodies completely eliminated. Therefore, they continue suffering from the seriously aching diseases and end up without the hope of regaining. Due to this, they get themselves in situations where they think that the only option is to wait for their end of life. Since they have no other helpful way in this kind of situations, their only preferable remedy is to choose death in which they believe to gain everlasting happiness about their life.The principles that are used to justify other forms of killing would be equally used in the justification of the voluntary medical killing/euthanasia. Despite the arguments that exist on the matter, the fact remains that the acts of taking the human life in the uterus can be also applied to the life out of the uterus. Euthanasia is no longer objected on the traditional basis of taking the lives of human beings and should not be justified as an act of suicide. If it is seen as suicide or murder, it would be open to legal and social objections to its application (Leadership University).
Some people's choices embrace the cultural logic of euthanasia which has some conflicting sets of ideologies that are not respected by the culture. This brings about the distinction between the redeemable human bodies and those that are considered to be disposable. Some approaches eliminate the bodies while others tend to eliminate them. The logical of euthanasia is posited not simply to eliminate such persons with any disability but as a significant concept that manifests some notions of choice, happiness and control (Ashcroft E, Dawson A & Draper H. Pg 492).An action should be taken through the use of the living wills and also making some early directives which contributes to the improved communication and the developed health care plans leading to the facilitation of the patients autonomy. The society is supposed to give due respect to the individual preferences for assisted suicide and it is also vital for the society to redirect the attention to the responsibility of all people to provide the required care to the elderly, the sick and those with different kinds of vulnerabilities. To achieve this, appropriate research, finance and advanced education are the major requirements. If the three requirements are met, the society will be in a position of realizing the alternative to the action of assisted suicide or euthanasia.