The Right to Die - Argument

Running head: THE RIGHT TO DIE
THE RIGHT TO DIE
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1
THE RIGHT TO DIE
The paper seeks to identify the primary argument in the essay namely, “The Right to
Die”. Norman Cousins has argued that euthanasia should be accepted and must be exempted
from the “condemnation” of other people especially belonging to different religious
community. He justifies his argument through the opinion of Dr Van Dusen that he left along
with his wife Henry Dusen after their death.
Cousins justifiably argues that people should respect the decision of other people who
are willing to discontinue their lives when they do not find any beauty and meaning in it. As
the Dusen contemplates, “does an individual have the obligation to go on living even when
the beauty and meaning and power of life are gone?” Cousins also agrees that when the life
stops showing any color or it goes on flowing without any meaning rather is loaded with
filthy medical complications, it should be reconsidered. With the logic of saving the world
from the scarcity of medical equipment, the Dusens believed that when they have already
lived a complete cycle of life and have seen all the emotions playing simultaneously in their
lives they do not have any point of regret. Rather they focused on what they could possibly
leave behind for the world. They decided to abandon the place “with too many mouths and
too little food” (Cousins 2020). They thought it is better to leave the world for the people who
still have hope and possibilities.
Being a face of Protestant Theology Dusen did not think of annihilating his and his
wife’s lives to be a crime rather he was prepared that people who protect the law of God
might condemn the whole idea of terminating their lives. Therefore he talked about “free
will”. God has bestowed the power of free will to every single human walking under the sun
and everyone has the right to exercise it properly under appropriate circumstances. Cousins
supported the idea that Dusen never wanted to live a “caricature” of life. The life they wanted
to live has been rather overwhelmingly lived by them (Hoefler 2019). Similarly the people

2
THE RIGHT TO DIE
who have seen almost to the edge of lives they should have the dignity to end it if they wish.
That not only saves the world from the problem of overpopulation but also ensures their
remaining respect for their families.
Some countries harshly impose unacceptable penalty on people who simply desire to
terminate their lives. However, the author of the essay believes that everyone is a child of
God and everyone must be given the share of respect they deserve and by this he meant that
everyone has the right to take a decision regarding the termination of their lives with dignity.
He condemns the law to be “futile” (Kridel 2019). If an individual decides to bid farewell to
his family on his own wish at the point of abandoning his life, he should be respected and
must be supported. The society should let him do what he wants for the sake of humanity.
Therefore it can be concluded that the Cousins has rightfully argued that one should
have the right to decide the time of his death and whether he wants to continue his life or not.
He has drawn extraordinary examples from the letters of Dusen and establishes that no
religion has ever said to continue a life without dignity and free will.

3
THE RIGHT TO DIE
References
Cousins, N., 2020. The Right To Die.
Hoefler, J.M., 2019. Deathright: Culture, medicine, politics and the right to die. Routledge.
Kridel, C., 2019. Thoughts for the Field: A Personal Epilogue for Educational
Biographers. Vitae Scholasticae, 36(1), p.6.