I begin in the name of God, with my hopes attached for my subject is complex and with a troubled soul that is at unrest with each word I type. It is said to be better to debate a question without settling it, than it is to settle a question without debating it. Having said that, my objective is to debate the subject and resolve it as well, keeping my readers into consideration.
Without further troubling the reader, the reason for my spiritual chaos and the constant war between right and wrong in my head is Euthanasia. For those who are unaware, it is the process of painlessly helping an incurably ill person to die, also very well known as “assisted suicide” and “mercy killing”. Generally euthanasia is performed by lethal injection, using the same drugs as those on death row are performed. Having it strictly banned in different parts of the world, there are reasons for supporting and opposing euthanasia which punctuate discussions in the mind of an individual constantly.
Karen Ann Quinlan collapsed on April 15th, 1975. She was twenty-one years old. Within hours, she entered a coma from which she could never recover. Her parents, Roman Catholics, knew their daughter would not want to be kept alive by extraordinary means. A year later, as Karen lay in a “persistent vegetative state,” the courts finally allowed her treatment to be stopped; but artificial feeding was continued and she was maintained as a living dead body until June 1985, when she eventually died of pneumonia. Consequently her case stimulated thousands of letters of sympathy and fuelled the “right to die” movement.
Ramon Sanpedro hunted, through the courts, the assistance of a doctor to help him die with dignity. He was paralyzed in Spain as a result of a swimming accident during his youth. He described himself as “a head attached to a corpse.” His exact words:
“Why die? Because every journey has its departure time and only the traveler has the privilege and the right to choose the last day to get out.
Why to die?, because at times the journey of no return is the best path that reason can show us out of love and respect for life, so that life may have a dignified death.” Ramon certainly did not suggest how other people confined in the same situation might feel. In fact, there are some people out there who, regardless of having the worst physical complexities in life, take enjoyment in living and continuing life as it follows. But Ramon made his choice and choice should be respected, however ensuring, according to the very concept of Utilitarianism, that no other individual’s life is endangered or pressurized.
Supporters of euthanasia are inclined to believe it is a dignified death and must be legalized as it proves to be a pain-free relief for many terminal patients.
On the contrary, a good question to ask is who benefits from the person dying? If a person dies, who will inherit? Who has the decision power? Is it a medical decision that is totally objective or a decision given by the family members that in some way may be biased? Are we not playing God’s role by choosing the time and procedure of our death? Is euthanasia not a nickname of “murder”?
Does it not rob one of his remaining times on earth? Who has the final say, the patient or the doctor?
The argument rages on and on. There are a lot of what ifs and whos and these need to be scrutinized in detail by lawyers, doctors and predominantly governments.
This article is open to all relevant comments, debate and solutions that bring this war between legitimacy and illegitimacy of euthanasia to a positive end!
Wackohead 
Recent Comments