Analytical Essay on Euthanasia

Euthanasia, also known as mercy killing, or the action of bringing an end to a person’s life via a medical procedure to get rid of the suffering from a painful or incurable disease. In this literature review, we will be focusing on the people’s rights regarding euthanasia and the perspective of healthcare professionals towards it. In addition to this, we will be weighing the pros and cons of euthanasia followed by the religious and ethical considerations.

A lot of debate has been going on if euthanasia should be everyone’s right but (Willingham, 2017) states that mental illness would not provide valid grounds for taking one’s own life. In contrast, patients with depression or schizophrenia in Belgium have the right to euthanasia (Thienpont et al., 2015), and in some jurisdictions, euthanasia is approved by legislators even for patients with non-terminal illnesses (Kim, De Vries, & Peteet, 2016). While we are constantly working hard to make this world a better place, the concept of taking one’s own life has been introduced in society which has become a topic of debate questioning the validity of the concept and if it should be legalized and made everyone’s right. The issue under review is if euthanasia is everyone’s right or not, and by the end of this literature review, will cover a number of perspectives on this topic and provide a wider view.

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

Euthanasia has been fairly debated on the basis of its merits and demerits. As many people are in favor of Euthanasia, it is being legalized throughout the world. Research conducted over the decades has depicted that the citizens of most nations support the legalization of euthanasia (Cohen, Van Landeghem, Carpentier, & Deliens, et al 2014). It has been found that the major reasons why patients consider euthanasia is due to their fear of losing control and being a burden on the family. (Robinson, 2017) states that we need to make the public understand that making euthanasia legal does not mean one person killing another, it means giving people a moral choice of dying with dignity, which is the very core of democracy. Euthanasia is for the benefit of the patient, it would be inhuman and grievous to put them through the intolerable torment. A person under such an illness where viable treatment would not make their situation better, ought to be given the freedom to pick initiated death. The word ‘euthanasia’ is originally derived from ancient Greek meaning good (eu) death (Thanatos). Another evident side benefit to this is that the bed space taken by a patient showing no signs or hopes of improvement could free up expensive equipment, bed, and intensive care for someone who could make better use of it. Assisting death in no way precludes giving the best palliative care possible but rather integrates compassionate care and respect for the patient’s autonomy. Euthanasia is the most controversial and yearning theme of logical research which is on the very edge of medication and law. In today’s world, there is no single way to deal with the perspectives of euthanasia.

With all the merits that come with the establishment of euthanasia, there are a number of unignorable demerits. With ethical considerations, mercy killing is not justified. With euthanasia, comes the corruption of the worst kind. Documentation for cases of euthanasia is a legal requirement. Schuklenk, U. (2015). Claims that pediatric euthanasia is corrupt and inaccurate. He provided the statistics that patient consent in euthanasia was documented in 12% of unreported cases and just 72% of reported cases. Insurance companies could use euthanasia as a way to save money on people by not having to pay for intensive care and expensive equipment and medicines. In addition to this, doctors could start seeing euthanasia as a way out. This could tamper with their dedication and effort into each patient and could become an easy way out. Even if the patient wanted to opt for euthanasia, there could be an external factor influencing the decision such as pressure from the family, or the family’s motive to inherit the property, or taking control over business. Euthanasia devalues human life. Patients could misuse it as much as doctors as both parties could consider it as a solution to any hardship or critical situation.

Furthermore, ethical violations are increasing in the form of underreporting, protocol mishandling, and conflicts of interest. A social debate on this issue has been stretched out regarding the involvement of euthanasia in bioethics and religion. Mostly all religions condemn euthanasia as the majority of religions have very strict views on taking lives, especially your own. It is viewed as the ultimate sin against god. In religion and ethics, the sanctity of life is a principle of implied protection regarding aspects of life. Life is considered a gift of god and is forbidden to take your own life. Is euthanasia murder? Christianity follows 10 commandments, the most important one being ‘do not commit murder’. If someone’s life is taken away earlier than god planned, then it is considered murder. The ethical consideration of ‘autonomy’ in healthcare professionals meaning ‘patient’s right to informed consent’ and nonmaleficence meaning ‘do no harm’ directly contradicts the religious point of view as euthanasia could actually be the better option in a situation where the patient is suffering badly.

References:

1. Ay, M. A., & Öz, F. (2019). Nurses attitudes towards death, dying patients and euthanasia: A descriptive study. Nursing Ethics, 26(5), 1442–1457. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969733017748481
2. Levin, K., Bradley, G. L., & Duffy, A. (2018). Attitudes Toward Euthanasia for Patients Who Suffer From Physical or Mental Illness. Omega, 30222818754667. https://doi.org/10.1177/0030222818754667
3. Güell, E., Ramos, A., Zertuche, T., & Pascual, A. (2015). Verbalized desire for death or euthanasia in advanced cancer patients receiving palliative care, 13(2), 295–303. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1478951514000121
4. Mahmoud Khaled Al Hamarsheh, & Majd Mrayyan. (2018). Cancer Patients Who Elect Euthanasia as an Option: An Argumentative Essay. Middle East Journal of Cancer, 9(3), 253–258.
5. Coggon, J. (2013). The Wonder of Euthanasia: A Debate that’s Being Done to Death. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 33(2), 401–419. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqs030
6. Robinson, Ian. (2017). Why you should vote to legalize euthanasia, even if you oppose it yourself: A defense of personal choice. Australian Rationalist, The, 106, 7-8.
7. Coombs, M. A. (2016). Treatment withdrawal, allowing a natural death, passive euthanasia: a careful choice of words. Nursing in Critical Care, 21(4), 193–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/nicc.12247
8. R. O. Stefanchuk, A. O. Yanchuk, M. М. Stefanchuk, M. О. Stefanchuk, & N. Ye. Blazhivska. (2018). The right to euthanasia: for or against? Patologìâ, 15(3), 390–395. https://doi.org/10.14739/2310-1237.2018.3.151873
9. Schuklenk, U. (2015). The ethical case against assisted euthanasia has not been made. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 149(6), 1685–1686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2015.02.010
10. Abdi Omar Shuriye. (2012). Ethical And Religious Analysis On Euthanasia. International Islamic University Malaysia Engineering Journal, 12(5), 209–211. https://doi.org/10.31436/iiumej.v12i5.26