Arguments in Favour of Euthanasia

Arguments in Favour of Euthanasia

Introduction

The debate over euthanasia and assisted suicide has been greatly expanded in recent years, interestingly becoming more and more acceptable with the medical society and general public since the categories involves the care of incurable patients (Garrard & Wilkinson 2005). This paper discusses the aspect that everyone deserves the right to a peaceful death and that voluntary euthanasia should be legalised for older persons with dementia. There are two major arguments: the first relies on the respect for the autonomy and beneficence of the patient and the second extends the concept of care to include the help offered to those who intend to die with dignity (Cohen-Almagor 2004; Tabadoa 2003).

Discussion

Euthanasia can be broadly defined as any act done by doctors or others, in order to hasten or cause the death of a person (Engdahl 2007). This act aims to put an end to a situation of both physical and mental suffering that the sick, or those to whom the patient is entitled to represent the interests, or in other words, his or her relatives (Engdahl 2007). The situation arises due to the fact that the scenario is no longer tolerable and there is no possibility that a medical procedure can, even temporarily, provide relief (Garrard & Wilkinson 2005). Active euthanasia involves establishing or accelerating death through the direct intervention of the physician, using lethal drugs (such as a fast-acting barbiturate that induces coma and a high dose of potassium chloride, which determines the cardiac arrest) (Tabadoa 2003).

The word voluntary euthanasia is the express intent of the person wanting to die and distinguishes it from mercy killing or any other form of killing (Jackson & Keown 2012). Voluntary euthanasia is performed by an autonomous demand of an informed patient. According to the principle of autonomy, it refers to a situation when a rational patient chooses to make an informed and un-coerced decision. It is important when it comes to respecting a person's perspectives, including the right to hold certain views, to make certain choices, and to take certain actions based on their personal beliefs and values (Gastonguay1977). Medical health practitioners define autonomy as the right of a patient to make decisions about the care received without influence from a health care provider. This transforms into the fact that patients can decide if are willing to decide their life through voluntary euthanasia (Snyder 2006).

On the other hand, another ethical principle of beneficence involves promoting acts of mercy, kindness and charity that benefit the patient. Focusing on beneficence means to set the dignity of the individual as priority (Kohl 1975). For health care providers, beneficence is a moral responsibility to act for the advantage of the patients. All acts of beneficence are not obligatory but in principle the act is to aid others further their interests (Kuhse, H., & Singer, P. 2006). The principle of beneficence requires medical practitioners to help others, and historically, the belief held in public health, is a failure to benefit ...