Legalization of Euthanasia in Canada: A Cost-Benefit Analysis

Running head: EUTHANASIA
EUTHANASIA
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author note:

1
EUTHANASIA
Issues:
Legalization of euthanasia is debated in Canada
Judgments:
In the year 2016, Canada had legalized euthanasia in the nation which in the legal
voluntary forms is called the medically assisted dying. Bill C-14 had been passed by the
Parliament of Canada and the Canadian Criminal code had been amended and physician-
administered euthanasia (PAE) and physician-assisted suicide (PAS) had been legalized to end
the suffering of the terminally ill adults (Wright et al., 2015). Canada’s assisted dying law has
been seen to include legal safeguards that are aimed at preventing any form of abuses and
ensuring informed consent. It has been found that the laws are developed in ways by which
neither the legal witnesses nor the healthcare professionals can have any legal or financial
interests in the outcome of the patients (Murphy, 2018). However, still the concept of euthanasia
is a matter of debate not only among the esteemed politicians and the stakeholders of the
healthcare industry but also among the legal systems and the ordinary citizens. The debate, that
the euthanasia devalues human lives and that its legalization would result in more and more
criminal offences in the nation, had thereby not seen the light of stability and peace.
Thesis statement:
Although the legalization of euthanasia had been opposed by many political and social
welfare parties in the nation of Canada, cost-benefit analysis can reveal that the impact of its
benefits are higher than their disadvantages and hence euthanasia needs to be supported in the
nation. Therefore, the government’s decision can be rightly supported in legalization of
physician-administered euthanasia (PAE) and physician-assisted suicide (PAS) in Canada.

2
EUTHANASIA
Context of the issue:
Opponents of the euthanasia as well as physician-assisted suicides are mainly seen to
contend that healthcare professionals have the moral responsibilities in keeping their patients
alive as reflected by the Hippocratic Oath. They are mainly seen to argue that there remain
higher chances in existence of the “slippery slope” from euthanasia to that of murder. Therefore,
they believe that legalization of euthanasia unfairly targets the poor as well as the disabled and
thereby create incentives for the different insurance companies for terminating lives for saving
money that they have to provide individuals who are suffering (Russell, 2016). Besides, the age-
long debate of euthanasia over devaluating human lives had always affected the human right
activists and similar others. Another important practical problem that might be seen to be
associated with legalization of euthanasia is that it can become an effective mean of healthcare
cost containment as many of the individuals might have financial motives (Fontallis et al., 2018).
They are of the opinion that one cannot successfully differentiate between the legitimate appeal
and an illegitimate appeal as this may have financial underlining. Therefore, such issues and
judgments often result in a never ending debate and negative emotions among many in the nation
against the legalization of euthanasia.