Euthanasia is one of the most heated debates

Euthanasia is one of the most heated debates in society today. I argue that euthanasia is not morally correct because it always involves killing and ruins intrinsic value of human being.

Euthanasia goes against nature. Those that oppose say that it is mercy killing, but it is still killing. I am with the majority who are against this so-called mercy killing. Before presenting my arguments, it would be best to define the term “euthanasia”. Euthanasia is defined in many ways. Here are categories that fall in with the term euthanasia. “The term involuntary euthanasia is where the decision is not made by the person who is to die; the patient’s life is ended without the knowledge and consent.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

It is basically a form of murder. Passive euthanasia is to speed up the process of death to a person and stopping some type of support to let that take its course.’ (academic, coup) For Example: stopping medical procedures, stopping food, water and allowing the person to dehydrate or starve to death, and not delivering CPR.

“The term active euthanasia involves causing the death of a person through a direct action, in response from that person.” (ACADEMIC.COUP) A well-known example of that is the case of Dr. Kevorkian. He gave a lethal dose of medicine to kill a terminally ill patient. Dr.

Jack Kevorkian was a retired pathologist who assisted in the deaths of over 130 people. The famous court case of Dr. Jack Kevorkian brought awareness to the controversial issue of euthanasia to the public. “In Michigan, Dr. Jack Kevorkian was convicted of the second-degree murder because he administered a controlled substance to end the life of Thomas Youk and had prepared a video showing his action and let the video be broadcast on national television (NY Times). A different yet similar situation and legal case would come about Saskatchewan, Canada when a wheat farmer named Robert Latimer would take the question of euthanasia into his own hands. “Robert Latimer murdered his severely disabled daughter, Tracy, on October 24th, 2008.

Behind the reasoning for Latimer’s immoral act was he could not bear to witness his daughter suffering from a severe form of cerebral palsy. He killed her by placing Tracy in the back of his Chevy pickup, ran a hose from the exhaust to the cab, and watched her die. Latimer was convicted on November 4,1993 of first-degree murder.

The year after he was convicted of second-degree murder.” (Inclusion Daily). This asks a question: what is the difference between Latimer’s actions, killing his daughter who suffers from serious pain, and a doctor who was given permission from a loved one to kill an individual who is also suffering from a brutal pain? Eventually Dr. Jack Kevorkian, and Robert Latimer, were both charged with murder because they chose to practice euthanasia. If murder is prohibited by law because people take murder into their own hands to kill others, then why shouldn’t euthanasia be too since doctors kill their patients even if there is consent. A doctor must receive authorization to assist in the death of a patient who is overly sick. Because of this many have questioned why doesn’t Robert Latimer have the right to take his own daughters life, since a doctor would have had to ask him anyways to have the right to kill Tracy? Latimer apparently saved his daughter from suffering, which is the same reason many people chose to give permission for those who are not physically in good health to go through euthanasia.

Although, his methods were different, but they still had the same outcome as a person with a


I'm Casey!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out