Right To Kill Vs Right To Save

10 Pages 2477 Words

"Whose life is it, anyway?" A plea by the late Sue Rodrigues, a high-profile, terminally-ill resident of British Columbia, Canada, who suffered from a terminal illness. She was helped to commit suicide by a physician in violation of Canadian law.
In today's society there are many disagreements about the rights and wrongs of euthanasia. Although death is unavoidable for human beings, suffering before death is unbearable, not only for terminal patients, but for the family members and friends. So what is the solution? How can we ease the suffering of those whose death is both impending and imminent? Euthanasia is clearly better choice for terminal patients than suicide. The question is however, is it morally, ethically, and socially right. In our society, suicide is always traumatic for families and friends. If there is no alternative to relieve the suffering of terminal patients, then the more humane option to suicide is euthanasia. This is not the only option however, "An option for people that are unsure of euthanasia is called DNR or do not resuscitate". This means that if the patient has a heart attack or another potentially fatal problem in the hospital, "the doctors are told to perform a `No Code,' which means that they should let the patient die!
The word euthanasia is derived from the Greek word "eu" for good and "thantos" which means death and originally referred to intentional mercy killing. But the word euthanasia has acquired a more complex meaning in modern times. Supporters of euthanasia believe that a dying patient has the right to end their suffering and leave the world in a dignified manner. Those who are against euthanasia believe that man does not have the right to end another person's life no matter how much suffering they have to go through. Euthanasia is one of the most important public policy issues being debated, The outcome of debate will profoundly affect family relationships, interaction betwe...