Euthanasia has sparked many passionate debates and all around the world. Law changes are proposed only to be turned down because this topic deals with a precious commodity, human life.
So many factors influence someomes decision on which stance they take on the matter, ranging from the moral dilemma, emotional and physical pain, or even something as material as money.
The complexity of this situation makes it difficult to cover every aspect; therefore only three major points will be discussed.
Firstly the legal stance taken by governments will be covered, secondly the idea of human rights will be explored and lastly the financial strains of mercy killing are going to be investigated.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Legal
The fact that Euthanasia is illegal in New Zealand has not stopped some from making the decision to end their own lives or that of others. Many cases pop up over the years, Margaret Page being the latest. Margaret had suffered a cerebral haemorrhage many years ago and now at the age of 60 refused to eat or drink anything because she no longer wanted to live.
In 2004 Lesley Martin admitted to giving her mother a dose of Morphine and suffocating her with a pillow. She was found guilty of attempted murder and jailed. Also a few years back there was the case of a man who gave his elderly mother a fatal dose of morphine to aid her through her last moments, he was charged with murder.
Cases like these are showing us that legalising euthanasia is a slippery slope to legalised murder and is it just matters of time until doctors are given the right to end life instead of save? Will there no longer be a Hippocratic Oath taken upon graduation from medical school?
Some countries have already decided to cross this dangerously fine line between mercy killing and murder. In 2003 voluntary euthanasia was legalised in the Netherlands and Belgium.
In 2004 Lesley Martin admitted to giving her mother a dose of Morphine and suffocating her with a pillow. She was found guilty of attempted murder and jailed. Also a few years back there was the case of a man who gave his elderly mother a fatal dose of morphine to aid her through her last moments, he was charged with murder.
Cases like these are showing us that legalising euthanasia is a slippery slope to legalised murder and is it just matters of time until doctors are given the right to end life instead of save? Will there no longer be a Hippocratic Oath taken upon graduation from medical school?
Some countries have already decided to cross this dangerously fine line between mercy killing and murder. In 2003 voluntary euthanasia was legalised in the Netherlands and Belgium.
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Human RIghts
Western countries pride themselves on the notion of free will. This idea of a ‘right to die’ is what is argued by pro euthanasia supporters. Governments do not consider suicide a crime and it’s argued that euthanasia should also not be punishable either because if an individual wants to end their life due to difficulty, then they should be able to make the choice.
But then it can be argued from the opposite side of the spectrum, who actually should decide? This point makes sense because if, as in many cases, the patient is in such a vegetated state that they are not able to even speak, then how can we really know whether they want to live or die. In a case like this does the family decide? Or the partner? Or if they don’t have either, then a close friend maybe?
The case of Terri Schiavo has been immortalised when her case was dragged through the courts. Her estranged husband petitioned to have her feeding tube to be removed, whereas her parents wanted her to live. In the end and over years of court battles, in which the president of The United States also got involved, the decision to disconnect was carried out. In a situation like this the motives of the husband have to be questioned. Did he really care about her or was he just searching for a legal way to murder Terri?
But then it can be argued from the opposite side of the spectrum, who actually should decide? This point makes sense because if, as in many cases, the patient is in such a vegetated state that they are not able to even speak, then how can we really know whether they want to live or die. In a case like this does the family decide? Or the partner? Or if they don’t have either, then a close friend maybe?
The case of Terri Schiavo has been immortalised when her case was dragged through the courts. Her estranged husband petitioned to have her feeding tube to be removed, whereas her parents wanted her to live. In the end and over years of court battles, in which the president of The United States also got involved, the decision to disconnect was carried out. In a situation like this the motives of the husband have to be questioned. Did he really care about her or was he just searching for a legal way to murder Terri?
Monday, May 3, 2010
Financial
Doctors and nurses are in high demand all over the world and pro euthanasia activists say that these health and medical facilities should be used on people that have a chance of getting better. Why waste precious resources on someone that has no hope of being cured?
Research has shown that understaffed hospitals and healthcare services are more likely to make a mistake and provide a lesser quality of care. So maybe attending to a patient who wants to die immediately is not the best use of medical staff’s time and maybe many more lives can be saved if doctors and nurses had the time freed up to attend to other patients. But is this giving doctors too much power? They are just human after all and not to mention, do doctors even want to end lives when for centuries they have been saving them? Doctors take a Hippocratic Oath upon graduation from medical school which says something along the lines of “first do no harm” and performing acts of euthanasia would be in direct violation of this.
The pressure to quickly make a decision in order to save resources can accidently result in family and doctors making the wrong choice. Upon being told that you have only six months to live a patient may decide to end their life at four or five months before the pain got unbearable but this cuts down the time spent with family and friends. This also minimises the chance of discovering doctor error or even a new cure because miracles can happen.
Research has shown that understaffed hospitals and healthcare services are more likely to make a mistake and provide a lesser quality of care. So maybe attending to a patient who wants to die immediately is not the best use of medical staff’s time and maybe many more lives can be saved if doctors and nurses had the time freed up to attend to other patients. But is this giving doctors too much power? They are just human after all and not to mention, do doctors even want to end lives when for centuries they have been saving them? Doctors take a Hippocratic Oath upon graduation from medical school which says something along the lines of “first do no harm” and performing acts of euthanasia would be in direct violation of this.
The pressure to quickly make a decision in order to save resources can accidently result in family and doctors making the wrong choice. Upon being told that you have only six months to live a patient may decide to end their life at four or five months before the pain got unbearable but this cuts down the time spent with family and friends. This also minimises the chance of discovering doctor error or even a new cure because miracles can happen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)