Euthanasia: Ethical, Religious, and Practical Considerations

This article discusses the ethical, religious, and practical considerations surrounding euthanasia. It explores the types of euthanasia and the legal status in the United States. The practice of euthanasia has been a topic of intense debate for decades.

Running head: EUTHANASIA 1
Euthanasia
Institution
Student
Course
Date

EUTHANASIA 2
Euthanasia
Euthanasia refers to the killing of an extremely ill person's life in order to ease them of their
suffering. An individual who undergoes euthanasia normally has a terminal disorder. However
there are other cases where some individuals ask for their lives to be terminated. In most
instances, it is conducted at the patient’s demand but in some cases when they might be too sick
and the decision to do euthanasia is made by medics, relatives, or, in some scenarios, the law
courts. This practice has been at the central point of very intense conversations for several
decades and is surrounded by ethical, religious, as well as practical considerations. There are two
types of euthanasia, namely active and passive euthanasia (Fletcher, 2015).
Active euthanasia is illegal all over the United States. People keep hold of the rights as patients
to turn down medical treatments and to receive suitable management of suffering at their request
(passive euthanasia), even though the person’s choice speed up his/her deaths. In addition,
ineffective or unreasonably troublesome treatments, for example life-support machines, might be
removed under specific conditions and, under national laws and the majority state laws only with
the informed consent or approval of the patient or, in the case of the incompetence of the victim,
with the informed permit of the authorized stand-in (Emanuel, Onwuteaka-Philipsen, Urwin, &
Cohen, 2016). This practice has been illegalized in the US due the many questionable ethical
issues revolving around it
Euthanasia is an intentional action taken with the purpose of terminating a patient’s life, in order
to ease unrelenting pain. Sometimes a physician is permitted by law to terminate an individual’s
life through a painless means, provided the patient and their family members or stand-ins agree.
For some persons, the prospective of suffering from dementia can be enough grounds to make an

EUTHANASIA 3
advance directive (living will). A medical doctor may carry out euthanasia on a person with
dementia only if there is a directive in place, and/or the patient is undergoing intolerable
suffering with no hope of improvement (Woods, & Bickley Asher, 2015). Reasons for
conducting euthanasia are diverse but mainly it is done to save the patient from unbearable and
ease the family of the burdensome medical expenses.
I agree with some of the reasons which impel people to perform euthanasia. This practice gives
patient a chance for self-determination because it gives them a right to decide when and how
they should die. Death being a private issue, I think that state is not supposed to hamper the
person’s right to die. Besides, euthanasia allows an individual to die with dignity and as well
while in control of their situation. On the other side, relatives and friends are spared the hurt of
seeing their loved one go through a long-protracted death. However, despite the diminutive
merits put forward to justify euthanasia, proper considerations should be made before opting for
it. Patient’s consent should be there and if he is incompetent, a close representative should be
consulted to give an informed consent.
As a nurse I will not perform euthanasia. There is appropriate palliative care available that can
reduce or remove the need for patients to be in pain. So instead of killing the patient, it is better
to put him/her into a palliative care to abate the pain he is experiencing. Practicing it would
undermine my commitment as a nurse to save lives. Besides, it can easily damage the trust
existing between me and my patients. People I am dealing with might have different views
concerning my role and purpose if I happen to terminate life of an individual. Rather than
performing euthanasia, I would subject self into a rigorous search of cures and treatments for the
terminally ill.

EUTHANASIA 4
In conclusion, it is right to argue that euthanasia is wrong and should not be practiced. The
practice is against the ethical stands expected from nurses and all other medical practitioners.
Permitting euthanasia leads to less good care for the fatally sick. It weakens the commitment of
nurses and doctors to saving lives. Also, consenting to euthanasia discourages the search for new
treatments and cures for the fatally ill. It as well undermines the inspiration to offer high-quality
care for the dying, and good quality pain relief. In spite of the bogus reasons put forward to
rationalize euthanasia, this practice is morally wrong and ought to be denounced completely.

EUTHANASIA 5
References
Emanuel, E. J., Onwuteaka-Philipsen, B. D., Urwin, J. W., & Cohen, J. (2016). Attitudes and
practices of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide in the United States, Canada, and
Europe. Jama, 316(1), 79-90.
Fletcher, J. F. (2015). Morals and medicine: The moral problems of the patient's right to know
the truth, contraception, artificial insemination, sterilization, euthanasia. Princeton
University Press.
Woods, M., & Bickley Asher, J. (2015). Nurses and the euthanasia debate: reflections from New
Zealand. International nursing review, 62(1), 13-20.