Euthanasia For People With Terminal And Incurable Diseases

Euthanasia for people with terminal and incurable diseases

Introduction

In recent years, the method has been applied by which a patient suffering from a terminal and incurable disease can have the request to remove his life in order to minimize his suffering, since this only ends up reducing his physical, moral conditionAnd spiritual, this represents a path insured towards death for the patient, the benefit of this act is accepted from other points of view as long as the patient and family members agree with assisted death.

In Greece the conception of life was different, a bad life was not worthy of being lived and therefore eugenism, nor euthanasia complicated people;During the Middle Ages there were changes in front of death and the act of dying. . (Aguiar, 2009)

‘People who suffer from a terminal disease and suffer a lot of pain should have the right to end their lives, and those who help them should not be persecuted by justice’ (Hawking, 2006)

Currently, there is a very low number of countries that have decriminalized this method and among them are Canada and Colombia (2015), Netherlands, Luxembourg, Belgium (2016), and in them remains reflected as suicide or homicide. (Fita, 2016)

Euthanasia is a conflict of interest between life as a supreme legal good and the right to a quiet and dignified death, without imposition, medicine has governed by moral principles since ancient times, being the same ones who have made a guideline between the right andThe wrong thing for the development of professional duties.

(Rodríguez-ias, 2008)

Developing

In circumstances living is worse than dying, pain and suffering caused by a terminal disease can make life so dying and difficult to carry, death can be called as a "humanitarian act" and it is considered rational that the doctor helps to homicideAs a way of dying with dignity for the patient, suffering can go beyond pain as a result of the conditions in which he is suffering and you are making life impossible, irritable and unbearable;Life loses all happiness and meaning in which death is preferable.

There are laws that authorize this act, do so under the condition of ensuring the express and serious nature of the request by the patient who sees in death the best alternative to suppress all his options, decide when and how to die. (Mata, 2018)

Life is the essential value and must be protected by the State with all possible means, but the human part cannot be set aside by pointing out that death must be as traumatic and painful as possible, that alternative offers euthanasia, euthanasia,which is far from being a crime, their motives are of mercy for both the suffering and for those around them.

Those countries that practice this act around the world are only 5 that have laws that regulate at the state level;The state of Victoria in Australia will launch theirs in mid -2019, in some developed countries there are initiatives to boost their decriminalization. (Aguiar, 2009)

Counter -arguments

The expression of a desire for death does not mean that this patient is really looking forward to his life, there is evidence in which preventive measures against euthanasia abuse are ineffective and have been raped in countries where practice has been legalized as inBelgium and Netherlands implementing the administration of lethal substances without the patient’s consent, absence of terminal disease, psychiatrists without treatment and cases without being reported. (Martínez Die, 2002)

Many individuals who request euthanasia do not wantCulminating stage of life.

The pressure due to the legalization of euthanasia becomes confusing the problem of suffering with the life of the person through a period of depression, mentally or emotionally upset;It is a political duty that cannot be relegated to morals both particular. (Gentleman)

conclusion

Euthanasia is observed by a minority of people as an act of good faith, since it prevents sick people from suffering, taking into account that patients with all their mental faculties have the right to direct their lives until the end, deciding the best than the bestIt suits you, without being forced.

A way to help patients suffering from serious diseases that cause them to be connected to a machine or painful treatments without a life expectancy, who have passed through many moments of rehabilitation and now they only want to rest is to implement euthanasia orhave an irremediable death full of pain and suffering.

The "right to die" is absolutely false, since at some point, life ends in one way or another, more, every human being has the right to die in peace, quietly with dignity or simply when natural death comesThere will be nothing to object.

If euthanasia were legal, it would not enlarge the deaths, but would decrease the pain caused by some disease, however to live there is freedom and to die it should also have it, euthanasia will continue to exist with or without law.

Bibliography

• Marín-Olalla, f. (2018). Euthanasia: a 21st century right. Madrid, Spain: Association Right to die with dignity.
• Namela, c. (2009). Euthanasia: ethical, legal and medical perspective. Madrid: Editorial Ariel.
• Zurriaráin, r. G. (2018). Social aspects of euthanasia. Spain: Spanish Publications of Bioethics and Medical Ethics.