Should Euthanasia (assisted Suicide/dying) be made legal?
I'm writing a persuasive essay on assisted dying and I found an article saying that it will become legal in the UK in two years time. I'm writing against euthanasia but I need to include both sides of the argument. So what are your thoughts on assisted death? Should it be made legal?
Scroll to see replies
Very difficult and moral debate.
I'll be interested to see other people opinions.
Im not a big fan of this myself. I've met a few people in my time who have recovered from severe illness after being told all was done for.
I'll be interested to see other people opinions.
Im not a big fan of this myself. I've met a few people in my time who have recovered from severe illness after being told all was done for.
I'm a secularist and an anti-theist but I don't think we should legalise euthanasia.
Reason being due to palliative care. Let me show you the argument:
P1 - Good Palliative care reduces the desire of someone to want to die.
P2 - Palliative care advances and progresses through funding gained from primarily governments but also some private firms, especially in other countries than England.
P3 - If euthanasia is illegal then fewer people with terminal, painful illnesses will die.
C1 - Therefore if euthanasia is illegal the demand for palliative care will increase relative to how much the demand for palliative care would change if euthanasia was made legal because more people with terminal painful illnesses would die.
P4 - If the demand for palliative care is higher this means that the provision of palliative care is more profitable for private firms and more of a pertinent issue for governments.
P5 - If provision of palliative care is more profitable then more money will be invested into research for it.
P6 - More money invested in research will lead to better palliative care.
C2 - Therefore from P6 and by P1 in such a society where euthanasia was kept illegal we will end up having far better palliative care far sooner. This will result in a scenario in which we have people voluntarily living and contributing to society for far longer than before as opposed to the alternate society in which euthanasia was made legal and once someone hits 85 they have a very high chance of committing suicide via euthanasia.
P7 - The second society is morally inferior to the first.
C3 - We should not legalise euthanasia.
Reason being due to palliative care. Let me show you the argument:
P1 - Good Palliative care reduces the desire of someone to want to die.
P2 - Palliative care advances and progresses through funding gained from primarily governments but also some private firms, especially in other countries than England.
P3 - If euthanasia is illegal then fewer people with terminal, painful illnesses will die.
C1 - Therefore if euthanasia is illegal the demand for palliative care will increase relative to how much the demand for palliative care would change if euthanasia was made legal because more people with terminal painful illnesses would die.
P4 - If the demand for palliative care is higher this means that the provision of palliative care is more profitable for private firms and more of a pertinent issue for governments.
P5 - If provision of palliative care is more profitable then more money will be invested into research for it.
P6 - More money invested in research will lead to better palliative care.
C2 - Therefore from P6 and by P1 in such a society where euthanasia was kept illegal we will end up having far better palliative care far sooner. This will result in a scenario in which we have people voluntarily living and contributing to society for far longer than before as opposed to the alternate society in which euthanasia was made legal and once someone hits 85 they have a very high chance of committing suicide via euthanasia.
P7 - The second society is morally inferior to the first.
C3 - We should not legalise euthanasia.
(edited 9 years ago)
In general, I'm pro-euthanasia availability, given enough safeguards and checks. Currently it is available - just not in the UK, meaning it's only a realistic option if you're rich enough to afford to travel to private clinics in countries that do it. And if there are going to be restrictions that prevent the growth of a culture where suicide is the default option, I don't think they should be based on wealth and privilege.
The investment in palliative care is a very strong one, though.
The investment in palliative care is a very strong one, though.
Absolutely in my view, without a doubt. It's your life, and your life alone. As long as you're in a healthy frame of mind, I think the choice to die should be yours to make.
Absolutely.
If it's your life, you should get to chose what to do with it. Obviously, there should be some sort of system to ensure the person has considered all aspects of their choice and are not feeling pressured into it in any way. Personally, I'd rather die than get to the stage in life where you can't do anything for yourself.
If it's your life, you should get to chose what to do with it. Obviously, there should be some sort of system to ensure the person has considered all aspects of their choice and are not feeling pressured into it in any way. Personally, I'd rather die than get to the stage in life where you can't do anything for yourself.
Moved to Society.
In my view, absolutely. The state should have no right to limit people's autonomy in such a way that they have no dictation over what they wish to do with their life. With that said, safeguards would be essential with something like this. This would mean assessments of a patient's mental state, consideration of their time left to live and how comfortably they can live it (even with the help of palliative care) etc. And even if they passed all these assessments, I would want to see forms signed off by 2 or 3 doctors at minimum, just to assure that the process is rigorous and consistent.
People like Tony Nicklinson should never have had to endure such terrible living circumstances against their will. In the end, Tony Nicklinson had to end his own life by refusing to eat. It's so sad that the state can actually force people like this to suffer against their will.
So, in short, yes I support euthanasia and assisted suicide, providing the right safeguards are put in place to protect the vulnerable.
In my view, absolutely. The state should have no right to limit people's autonomy in such a way that they have no dictation over what they wish to do with their life. With that said, safeguards would be essential with something like this. This would mean assessments of a patient's mental state, consideration of their time left to live and how comfortably they can live it (even with the help of palliative care) etc. And even if they passed all these assessments, I would want to see forms signed off by 2 or 3 doctors at minimum, just to assure that the process is rigorous and consistent.
People like Tony Nicklinson should never have had to endure such terrible living circumstances against their will. In the end, Tony Nicklinson had to end his own life by refusing to eat. It's so sad that the state can actually force people like this to suffer against their will.
So, in short, yes I support euthanasia and assisted suicide, providing the right safeguards are put in place to protect the vulnerable.
No. I think that opens a window for shady business, and it can't be undone.
And I believe it would diminish the motivation for cures for terminal illnesses. Although, I think passive euthanasia should be legal. If it's the case that life is being stabilised artificially alone, then I guess the soul has already left the body and we should let them free.
And I believe it would diminish the motivation for cures for terminal illnesses. Although, I think passive euthanasia should be legal. If it's the case that life is being stabilised artificially alone, then I guess the soul has already left the body and we should let them free.
Original post by aoxa
Absolutely.
If it's your life, you should get to chose what to do with it. Obviously, there should be some sort of system to ensure the person has considered all aspects of their choice and are not feeling pressured into it in any way. Personally, I'd rather die than get to the stage in life where you can't do anything for yourself.
If it's your life, you should get to chose what to do with it. Obviously, there should be some sort of system to ensure the person has considered all aspects of their choice and are not feeling pressured into it in any way. Personally, I'd rather die than get to the stage in life where you can't do anything for yourself.
But can you truly eliminate these pressures? Because with legalisation, will come normalisation. And soon the option to die may become a duty too. Seeing as patients will inevitably, even if unintentional, be made to feel like an emotional, physical and financial burden to the hospital and to relatives - It wouldn't come as a surprise if patients resorted to assisted suicide for the sake of others, as opposed to the sake of themselves.
yes; human beings are intelligent enough to determine whether they want to live or die, and they have the authority to choose because they own their bodies and they do what they want with them. the government doesn't own our bodies (the alternative perspective). if people are worried that doctors will manipulate people into killing themselves, then perhaps it's not euthanasia but the institutions regulating euthanasia that would need to be sound - maybe a court judge shoulld be involved to approve the process in the case of mentally ill people.
Original post by WIFIchaser
I'm writing a persuasive essay on assisted dying and I found an article saying that it will become legal in the UK in two years time. I'm writing against euthanasia but I need to include both sides of the argument. So what are your thoughts on assisted death? Should it be made legal?
Google mik scarlet's articles on assisted dying for some clear points against any change to the law.
Likewise Dame Tanni Grey-Thompson's speeches in the house of lords (should be available on hansard?).
Sorry I'm on my phone or I'd google the links up for you.
I'm strongly against any law that deems some lives to be worth less than others based on disability/illness. In my view a suicidal person should be helped and supported by the medical profession - not told in some cases that they're right in thinking their life is not worth living.
I'm more interested in changing the law a support to improve independent living and end of life care than in giving in to non-disabled people's fears.
As some user has already said, legalizing euthanasia will reduce demand for palliative care, thus its development will most certainly slow down. Given that the main argument for euthanasia is to end the suffering of a person, and modern western technology can already remove pain and suffering via drugs and anaesthetics, euthanasia seems a bit primitive.
Many people who have been suicidal have since changed their minds. Many want to die of totally trivial reasons, such as depression due to their partner leaving them, loneliness, alcoholism etc. Many want to die, because they've lost their one of their limbs etc - these I think are not good reasons and when people are given the time to rethink things, they change their mind. Euthanasia may very well open the door for people killing themselves for utterly trivial reasons.
Thirdly, the argument against euthanasia can also be a cultural one - euthanasia may very well irreversibly change our attitudes towards death and towards those, who are dependent on other for their survival. The proliferation of euthanasia can foster the mentality that if you become a burden to your friends and family (you become paralysed for example), then you have a moral and societal duty to die. The elderly and the disabled may feel pressured into killing themselves, to not be a burden on their family and to also free up valuable medical resources for members of society who are more productive. The more instances, where people have themselves euthanised for the sake of others - this will most likely be documented by social media, news etc - the more the cultural norms shift towards the mentality that if you can't take care of yourself, then it's time to die. Continuing to live while being a burden to others may actually be seen as the ultimate act of selfishness whereas killing yourself is the ultimate act of altruism.
Fourthly, every country that has legalized euthanasia has fallen down the slippery slope of positive euthanasia - that is people are euthanised without their consent. See the Netherlands and Holland.
Many people who have been suicidal have since changed their minds. Many want to die of totally trivial reasons, such as depression due to their partner leaving them, loneliness, alcoholism etc. Many want to die, because they've lost their one of their limbs etc - these I think are not good reasons and when people are given the time to rethink things, they change their mind. Euthanasia may very well open the door for people killing themselves for utterly trivial reasons.
Thirdly, the argument against euthanasia can also be a cultural one - euthanasia may very well irreversibly change our attitudes towards death and towards those, who are dependent on other for their survival. The proliferation of euthanasia can foster the mentality that if you become a burden to your friends and family (you become paralysed for example), then you have a moral and societal duty to die. The elderly and the disabled may feel pressured into killing themselves, to not be a burden on their family and to also free up valuable medical resources for members of society who are more productive. The more instances, where people have themselves euthanised for the sake of others - this will most likely be documented by social media, news etc - the more the cultural norms shift towards the mentality that if you can't take care of yourself, then it's time to die. Continuing to live while being a burden to others may actually be seen as the ultimate act of selfishness whereas killing yourself is the ultimate act of altruism.
Fourthly, every country that has legalized euthanasia has fallen down the slippery slope of positive euthanasia - that is people are euthanised without their consent. See the Netherlands and Holland.
(edited 9 years ago)
People should have the right to die with dignity, suicide is already legal, however this right is denied to people who are too disabled to kill themselves. It is a clear example of ableism. Suicide can be a very unpleasant affair but if doing so required speaking to psychiatrists and lots of health checks then numbers can be reduced and if it does go ahead it can be done as peacefully as possible.
Original post by BefuddledPenguin
People should have the right to die with dignity, suicide is already legal, however this right is denied to people who are too disabled to kill themselves. It is a clear example of ableism. Suicide can be a very unpleasant affair but if doing so required speaking to psychiatrists and lots of health checks then numbers can be reduced and if it does go ahead it can be done as peacefully as possible.
Do you think doctors should be legally obligated to kill their patients, when the patients demand it? Even if the doctor is ethically opposed to it? If so, what should the punishment be?
I can't imagine killing someone, even if the patient wanted it. That's just me though.
Original post by BefuddledPenguin
People should have the right to die with dignity, suicide is already legal, however this right is denied to people who are too disabled to kill themselves. It is a clear example of ableism. Suicide can be a very unpleasant affair but if doing so required speaking to psychiatrists and lots of health checks then numbers can be reduced and if it does go ahead it can be done as peacefully as possible.
I'd listen to disabled people's views on proposed changes to the law before you declare the status quo as ableist.
http://www.scope.org.uk/media/press-releases/july-2014/assisted-suicide-law
Original post by Zorgotron
Do you think doctors should be legally obligated to kill their patients, when the patients demand it? Even if the doctor is ethically opposed to it? If so, what should the punishment be?
I can't imagine killing someone, even if the patient wanted it. That's just me though.
I can't imagine killing someone, even if the patient wanted it. That's just me though.
Well no, I'd say that euthanasia should be a specified skill, that only certain doctors perform. It certainly wouldn't be a GP thing. Maybe a dedicated euthanasia clinic or ward.
Original post by Truths
But can you truly eliminate these pressures? Because with legalisation, will come normalisation. And soon the option to die may become a duty too. Seeing as patients will inevitably, even if unintentional, be made to feel like an emotional, physical and financial burden to the hospital and to relatives - It wouldn't come as a surprise if patients resorted to assisted suicide for the sake of others, as opposed to the sake of themselves.
What is stopping them from killing themselves currently?
Original post by TorpidPhil
I'm a secularist and an anti-theist but I don't think we should legalise euthanasia.
P3 - If euthanasia is illegal then fewer people with terminal, painful illnesses will die.
C1 - Therefore if euthanasia is illegal the demand for palliative care will increase relative to how much the demand for palliative care would change if euthanasia was made legal because more people with terminal painful illnesses would die.
P3 - If euthanasia is illegal then fewer people with terminal, painful illnesses will die.
C1 - Therefore if euthanasia is illegal the demand for palliative care will increase relative to how much the demand for palliative care would change if euthanasia was made legal because more people with terminal painful illnesses would die.
You do know what "terminal" means, right? In short, if someone tells you that you're terminal, you're ****ed. You can get a second, third, fourth, or fifty sixth opinion on your condition, but if everyone says that you're terminal and you show no signs of improving, you're a goner.
I don't know about you, but I'd rather end my life with quiet dignity than slowly lose all control over my body before succumbing to a horrifically painful and drawn out death. It's my life, I'll end it if I want to. The government should have no say in that whatsoever.
Unfortunately, that doesn't do away with the potential for it to be abused. Then again, life isn't for everyone. If you want to die, why not? I think that at least 1 medical professional should be consulted and a trip to the counsellors office planned before you're actually given the medical means to die (this excludes terminally ill people), but if you genuinely want to end your life then you may as well do so while maintaining your dignity instead of jumping in front of a train and turning a standard commute into a hassle for someone else (if someone wants to die that badly, they'll do themselves in without regard for whether it's legal or not).
Original post by Drunk Punx
You do know what "terminal" means, right? In short, if someone tells you that you're terminal, you're ****ed. You can get a second, third, fourth, or fifty sixth opinion on your condition, but if everyone says that you're terminal and you show no signs of improving, you're a goner.
I don't know about you, but I'd rather end my life with quiet dignity than slowly lose all control over my body before succumbing to a horrifically painful and drawn out death. It's my life, I'll end it if I want to. The government should have no say in that whatsoever.
Unfortunately, that doesn't do away with the potential for it to be abused. Then again, life isn't for everyone. If you want to die, why not? I think that at least 1 medical professional should be consulted and a trip to the counsellors office planned before you're actually given the medical means to die (this excludes terminally ill people), but if you genuinely want to end your life then you may as well do so while maintaining your dignity instead of jumping in front of a train and turning a standard commute into a hassle for someone else (if someone wants to die that badly, they'll do themselves in without regard for whether it's legal or not).
I don't know about you, but I'd rather end my life with quiet dignity than slowly lose all control over my body before succumbing to a horrifically painful and drawn out death. It's my life, I'll end it if I want to. The government should have no say in that whatsoever.
Unfortunately, that doesn't do away with the potential for it to be abused. Then again, life isn't for everyone. If you want to die, why not? I think that at least 1 medical professional should be consulted and a trip to the counsellors office planned before you're actually given the medical means to die (this excludes terminally ill people), but if you genuinely want to end your life then you may as well do so while maintaining your dignity instead of jumping in front of a train and turning a standard commute into a hassle for someone else (if someone wants to die that badly, they'll do themselves in without regard for whether it's legal or not).
I meant "fewer people will die in any given period of time". That should have been obvious since everyone dies anyway eventually. But yeah, it was an error on my behalf.
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
