Debates On Mercy Killings

If a Wife kills her Husband because of the pain he is in from his medical problems. Do you think that she should be charged with manslaughter, homicide, or any other charge acquitted to death of another human being? I say she should.

“Should euthanasia be legalized in our country?” This is indeed a question often discussed in community. In some countries like Holland, it’s already allowed, while the German politicians can’t stop discussing about it over and over again. Both states could argue with several statements and their opinions about it, but which of them would be correct? Is there even a right decision?

First of all, euthanasia, also called mercy killing, is the act of putting a person or animal to death painlessly or allowing it to die, as by withholding extreme medical measures, when it’s suffering from an incurable, especially a painful, disease or condition.

In other words, if a person is death-ill or otherwise has lost his will to live, doctors are allowed to end the patient’s life if they’re requested/allowed so by the person. Should the patient be unable to make the decision himself, his/her family has to decide if they want to continue with medical treatment or not. If an animal is suffering from an incurable disease or condition, the owner has to decide about its fate.

There are several forms of euthanasia:

Voluntary euthanasia is the form of euthanasia conducted with the patient’s permission.

Involuntary euthanasia is conducted without the explicit consent of the individual concerned and means that an individual makes a decision for another person incapable of doing so.

Both voluntary and involuntary euthanasia can be conducted passively or actively.

Passive euthanasia entails the withholding of common treatments, such as antibiotics, necessary for the continuance of life. The administration of increasingly necessary, although toxic doses of Opioid is regarded as a passive measure. Active euthanasia on the other hand is the conducting of life-limiting measures on the basis of the actual or presumed wish of a person and is also called “assisted suicide”.

Except for the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg, it is prohibited worldwide. Although euthanasia may not be a common and appreciated topic for daily-life, one can still find a lot of reasoning’s for and against it after a little research.

One of the most popular arguments to forbid (active) euthanasia is the question how it can be decided whether a patient is beyond any hope to heal or not. Even if the possibility of recovering is only up to a minimum, some people would refuse to end their loved-one’s life before time and rather waited for time and medicines to take care of the injury/disease if they’re not entirely sure that there’s no change of betterment.

And most important, what if the concerned person is no longer able to decide for himself? Who would be able to take the burden of ending a family member’s life? The guilt of having done something like that would surely shatter everyone’s mind, so it’s far easier to just wait and watch things develop.

Not to mention that it would be a violation of the Bible’s laws. As it is clearly written in the Ten Commandments, Exodus 20: 2-17, the sixth commandment says: “You shall not murder.” And isn’t murder defined as “killing of another human being with intent” ? So what is euthanasia but murder?

Adding to that, it can also be said that there had been cases in Holland where doctor’s conducted both passive and active euthanasia at their patients without permission. And that cannot be allowed in our state. But of course, there wouldn’t be a contra without a pro. In fact, all of the listed arguments above not to legalize euthanasia can be negated.

As a first addition, euthanasia is only conducted in really incurable cases, not after a simple car-accident where one has broken his leg and believes to suffer greatly, but more in cases where the patient can only be kept alive with great medical treatment, maybe even attached to a machine, having lost all power or abilities to take care of himself. If one is not aware of how much pain this inflicts on both the body and the mind of the concerned person, he can hardly understand how much of a release it would be for them to be allowed to let go. Especially old or handicapped people feel like a burden for their family.

As long as one is able to decide for himself, he has the right to determine what shall happen with him, this also including the right to end his life. And it would at least happen under medical observation, painlessly, which is really good. Just imagine, for example, your paralyzed uncle would want to end his life, but was not allowed to assign for it in a hospital, ending up directing his wheel-chair to the nearest stairs in his desperation – at full speed. No, nobody wants this to happen, do they?

Then let them finally fall asleep – and don’t disturb them. Death belongs to the flow of life just as well as life itself, it can’t be stopped, no matter how much we sometimes crave for it to change. I know, it’s hardly believable, but releasing a concerned family member is also a relief for the rest of the family. Of course there will be a lot of sorrow, but they will soon notice that is had been entirely to his best.

Another aspect is that you can’t let someone else suffer through great pain just because of your morals and your religion. Really, atheists won’t care a bit if it was against your god’s word to kill another person, because, stuck in unbearable pain, it simply doesn’t matter to them. Every person has his own definition of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’, so forcing someone else to follow your completely different ways would be the real crime.

As for the abuse of legalized mercy-killing in the Netherlandsaˆ¦ Well, sadly but true, that’s how our world functions. There will always be abuses of any kinds of rules, and there will never be a time when mankind decides to stop eating itself away. We’re like that. I don’t like it either, but we can’t just ignore it.

Finally, I would like to clarify that I neither fully favor nor forbid euthanasia because I can very well understand both sides of the argumentation. My personal opinion is that everyone should talk to their loved-ones to plan out what should happen in case of such an emergency, so that it will later be clear whether the person wants to live on or not.