Center number: PK234

Candidate name: Eshal Younas

Candidate number: 0066

TOPIC 3: Human Rights

Question: Is euthanasia for human beings justified in the 21st century?

Introduction:

Euthanasia is the practice of ending the life of a person to limit one's suffering. (1) The word itself has a Greek origin: the word ‘eu’ meaning good and ‘Thanatos’ meaning death (1). The whole idea of euthanasia is that instead of having someone suffering in continuous pain until they naturally pass on, they chemically induce a person's death to limit the amount of suffering. Though this seems like a useful and helpful procedure a lot of debate arises about it. There are only a handful of places that have legalized euthanasia: Switzerland, Netherlands, Spain, Belgium, Luxembourg, Australia, Canada, Colombia, the USA, and New Zealand(2). Though euthanasia was for a seemingly good cause there are many ways people can abuse the use of it as well.

For:

The ethicality of euthanasia depends on one's own moral beliefs.

The use of euthanasia can limit the suffering of terminally ill patients. Terminally ill patients suffer from irreversible conditions which one way or another will lead to permanent unconsciousness or death(18). In most cases, terminally ill patients are given a clear choice and it is purely their decision. If it's an option that isn't forced on the patient and the patient is prepared to have euthanasia as an option then it is being ethically used. For terminally ill patients dying is more beneficial than being alive and being given end-of-life care all the time(22). For instance, if a cancer patient's chemotherapy isn't working and is just putting them through more pain they might try to commit suicide if euthanasia isn't given as an option despite being a more appropriate way to end their pain(22).

Another argument is that patients who are terminally ill or in a vegetative state might not want to be a burden on their families(19). In many cases, people are afraid to lose self-dependency and do not want to be a burden on others(22). In some cases, constant treatments can also leave the patient financially unstable, and getting aid from family or relatives isn't an option(22). In such situations, euthanasia will be beneficial for the patient as it’ll limit physical and mental suffering for them. The patients' close relatives won’t have to suffer through the pain of having their loved one suffer constantly just to inevitably die in the end(21).

Using euthanasia more actively on terminally ill patients can also allow for more opportunities for organ transplants (19). This will help a lot of patients who might be at risk of organ failure(19).

If we are to look at euthanasia from this point of view it is giving the terminally ill a right to die and giving the patients in need of organs a right to live(19).

The use of euthanasia would also make sense if there is a general shortage of supplies in the medical field. A survey that was carried out at Dow Medical College and Civil Hospital Karachi Pakistan showed that doctors were actually in favor of legalizing euthanasia due to there not being sufficient resources available which was causing more pain for patients(22).

Against:

However, if we were to give medical facilities free use over euthanasia we might be putting too much power in the hands of doctors which could lead them to abuse the power(6). “Euthanasia and assisted suicide are not about the right to die. They are about the right to kill.” This was an argument raised by Rita Marker, executive director of the International Task Force on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide in the US(6). In most countries taking someone’s life to ease their pain is still considered killing someone(20). In countries where euthanasia is legalized, it has been used in cases that didn’t need it. In Belgium, two deaf twins were euthanized at their request because they were blind, as well as a woman who was euthanized simply because she had anorexia(20). It is extremely difficult to establish proper guidelines to limit euthanasia to only being used for the people it is made for. The examples above show that some people, instead of seeking forms of therapy, kill themselves because it is an option that is available to them. This makes euthanasia into assisted suicide as people will be killed upon their request. Suicide Act 1961 mentions that if someone is to help another in taking their life, they could be charged with 14 years in prison(5).

Another issue with legalizing Euthanasia would be the dispute between different religious beliefs. Islam does not allow euthanasia and even Catholics believe that such acts are pure evil and that life is something that only God can take away(8). The practice of euthanasia would interfere with the jurisdiction of God(12).

If more countries were to legalize euthanasia there is again the argument that we would never be able to have full control over it(8). The more normal it would become to use euthanasia, and the more accessible it is, the more likely it is to be misused.

In some cases, there are alternative treatments such as palliative care and hospice(8). It might not be necessary to kill the patient to relieve them of their pain. Palliative care takes away the pain of the patient while still keeping them alive(21). The WHO says that palliative care ‘intends to neither accelerate nor postpone death’(20). It allows the patient to still be able to live their life without constantly dreading the fact that they are going to die.

Evaluation of Sources :

When it comes to looking at the course of action for euthanasia there are multiple arguments raised. There seems to be no popular bias. When it comes to looking at whether using euthanasia is a justified act many consider it a slippery slope(13). If the use of assisted dying increases it will create an image for people that life should be lived without having to suffer(13).

correctly and having a safe attitude toward it is key(13). A balance should be found when it

comes to euthanasia, a patient's autonomy along with their beliefs and moralities should be

balanced to avoid miscommunication and keep a safe relationship between a patient and

doctor(13).

If we completely take out the use of euthanasia from medical fields and remove that as an

option for patients that doesn't sound like the right thing to do. Every single person shares

different beliefs and banning euthanasia completely will simply imply that their beliefs aren’t

correct, this is practically taking one's freedom away. If a patient requests it and their beliefs

don’t matter in the situation, they should be given the service(14). Evaluating whether

euthanasia is morally permissible completely relies on the patient and why it is being done(14).

Some people believe that a physician should never offer euthanasia to a patient or put it on the

table as an option, but if the patient themselves chooses such a route they should be able to aid

the process(14).

One's beliefs heavily matter when it comes to a patient using euthanasia. People with certain

religious beliefs seem to be against it and in the medical field, their view should be accepted,

and never should be forced into accepting euthanasia as the way to end their life. Many people

believe that it is just better to suffer and eventually meet your end rather than give up and end

things as is.

The use of euthanasia can have no harm if used ethically, which is using it if it aligns with one's

autonomy and one's beliefs and only upon the request of the patient.

Conclusion:

To conclude everything said above, Yes, it is justified as long the patient gives full consent. The

patient must also have a justified reason for requesting it. Euthanasia can only be considered an

act of justice if it complies with the autonomy and beliefs of the patient. Many views have

been seen and the only reasonable answer to this question is that it all depends on the patient

themselves: doctors have no say in the life of the patient. If euthanasia is used like this –

then there is no way to misuse it. If the patient is to ask for

such an option the medical field should provide alternatives because something else might be

better for them than just dying, especially with mentally troubled patients.

My perspective on this topic has slightly been altered as well. I was looking at this question

slightly biased toward ending the use of euthanasia completely, as my own religious beliefs

were against it, but looking into the topic more deeply broadened my mind and made me

consider that not everyone has the same views. Everyone has different morals and different

beliefs. It is all in the hands of the patients themselves to make such a decision.

Word count: 1555