Arguments for and against

Definitions

A variety of terms are used to describe the intentional termination of life. Euthanasia itself is said to be derived from the Greek, euthanatos, which means a gentle and easy death, but this hardly sums up what euthanasia is about. Killing in the name of compassion, or mercy killing, are other terms given to euthanasia.

In the Netherlands, euthanasia is understood to mean termination of life by a doctor at the request of a patient. The Dutch government doesn't turn a blind eye to it. There, the question of whether and how criminal liability for euthanasia should be restricted has been the subject of broad political and public debate for the past 30 years.

Euthanasia is categorized in different ways, which include voluntary, non-voluntary, or involuntary. Voluntary euthanasia is legal in some countries and U.S. states

Voluntary euthanasia simply emphasises that the choice to die has been made voluntarily by the person in question, rather than imposed on them by legal or social rules.

However, opponents of euthanasia often argue that it can be very difficult to be sure that someone's request is truly voluntarily made. For example, an elderly person requiring expensive healthcare may feel that they're such a burden to relatives that they should request euthanasia. There's also a risk that people being treated with powerful painkillers or cancer drugs may not be in a sufficiently clear state of mind or competent enough to make an informed and balanced judgement.

Non-voluntary euthanasia is illegal in all countries

Voluntary, non-voluntary and involuntary euthanasia can all be further divided into passive or active variants.

Passive euthanasia

Passive euthanasia entails the withholding of common treatments, such as antibiotics, necessary for the continuance of life.

Active euthanasia

Active euthanasia entails the use of lethal substances or forces, such as administering a lethal injection, to kill and is the most controversial means.

Arguments for and against

There are plenty of arguments against sanctioning euthanasia. For instance, how can we be sure a person really wants to die and isn't being taken advantage of (for financial reasons, for example)?

On the other hand, shouldn't people enduring unbearable suffering as part of terminal disease be allowed to relieve their agony and bring forward their inevitable death?

According to the historian N. D. A. Kemp, the origin of the contemporary debate on euthanasia started in 1870. Nevertheless, euthanasia was debated and practiced long before that date. Euthanasia was practised in Ancient Greece and Rome: for example, hemlock was employed as a means of hastening death on the island of Kea, a technique also employed in Marseilles and by Socrates in Athens. Euthanasia, in the sense of the deliberate hastening of a person's death, was supported by Socrates, Plato and Seneca the Elder in the ancient world, although Hippocrates appears to have spoken against the practice,

Around the world, different countries, even different states within countries, have alternate views on assisted suicide. Some countries have defined laws prohibiting the act, such as Canada, Italy, Russia, Hungary and Ireland. Others,such as Sweden and Germany have no specific law but a charge of ‘manslaughter’ may be brought against anyone assisting suicide.

Дата добавления: 2015-10-31