Cases Euthanasia example essay topic

Euthanasia After years of debate the issue of euthanasia has sparked my interest. Euthanasia should be legalized here in the United States. As we contemplate legalizing euthanasia many issues should be taken into consideration. One issue that should be taken into consideration is by religious orders. I feel a religion must support the decision of any person in their congregation who is about to die in whatever choices he or she makes. Euthanasia is a type of suicide that is intended to benefit the person who is dying and requires a final act by some other person.

Euthanasia comes from the Greek word 'eu thanatos' which means 'good death'. Even in the Greek culture the topic of euthanasia was a debated issue. Many religions feels that the holiest gift that was given to us from god was the right to life. These religions will not allow a religious burial if one commits any type of suicide.

Is this negligent of religions because they are not looking at the picture in whole? Should each case be looked at individually? I do think that suicide in general is morally wrong, but if there were a medical reason why you are exiting this world before your time is up I think you should have the right to a religious burial. There are certain conditions in which euthanasia should be available for a patient.

These conditions are as follows: 1. A patient is suffering from a terminate illness and it is unlikely that a cure for the illness will be found. 2. A person is dependent on a machine or other technological means of survival just to keep their life going.

3. There is a voluntary and rational wish to die from a patient that is in intolerable pain. These are the conditions in which euthanasia should be acceptable for religion. On the other hand a physician has to make an ethical and a moral decision before even considering performing euthanasia on one of his or her patients. The ethics that have to be taken into consideration by the physician are autonomy, beneficence, and non maleficence.

What is meant by these ethics? The ethic autonomy means that every "normal" person has the right to end his or her life at any time by himself or herself. What is meant by "normal"? A normal person is someone that is sane and also alert to their surrounding. The ethic beneficence means that a physician's main job is to relieve pain no matter how he does it. The ethic non maleficence means that a physician cannot do anything that would put his or her patients life in jeopardy.

These are the ethics that help some physicians act from administering any type of drug in which a life is purposely taken. Who is it up to when it comes to the decision of euthanasia, the physician's ethics or the laws of the United States? I think its up to a combination of people. It's mostly up to the person in pain, but there are other factors that come into play the family, the physicians, psychologists and the religious leaders of the person in question. All these people should gather and voice their opinions and show their point of views on the topic of euthanasia. A hypothetical situation that I think should consider euthanasia and should get a religious burial is what follows: John Clark was diagnosed with lung cancer at age 55 for the last eight years he had been going to chemotherapy three times a week.

While in chemotherapy John got so weak ho lost his ability to walk and was wheel chair bound. John also couldn't breath on his own and was hooked up to oxygen tanks twenty-four hours a day. John is currently bed ridden in the hospital and is unable to function without the assistance of machines. John has repeatedly expressed to his spouse Mary his desire to die with dignity stating that one whose life is run by machines and under constant supervision is not worth living. Mary has also expressed to John her view on his situation. She has stated that if he is that uncomfortable and that unhappy it would alright if he left this world, but she also expressed to him that he would be sorely missed.

Mary thinks between her families she will be able to take the consequences of his death. I think in this situation that John and Mary have thought everything through. John has done everything in his power to hold on but now is his time to die with dignity. Who should decide when it's time for John to die? Should it be him and his family or should it be the government just keeping him alive to be another statistic? Another hypothetical situation that I think should not even consider euthanasia and would not have the right to a religious burial is what follows: Luke age 31 was diagnosed with prostate cancer three days ago.

Luke and his family is taking this very hard because cancer runs in Luke's family. Luke has two young sons ages two and four and a daughter that was just born. The doctors are planning on Luke starting chemotherapy in the next week. Luke and his spouse Tina has talk about what to do in case something does happen to him. Luke knows that the road ahead of him is going to be a long and tiring one but he has it in his head that he is up for it.

I think in this case Luke has many options to take with his life. Euthanasia is the last thing on this man's mind, he still has his family plus the cancer is not taking over his body yet. If Luke did resort to euthanasia down the line when cancer took over his body and he was in just as bad shape as John was maybe then he could have a religious burial, but even then the question that would come into play was did Luke try hard enough to fight his problem or did he give up? Clearly, there should be some kind of euthanasia laws passed here in the United States even if religions in general will not compromise to look at every case of euthanasia individual. In many cases euthanasia shouldn't be used but the option should least be available.