The controversial debate surrounding medical euthanasia is not a new phenomenon as its origin can be traced back hundreds of years back. The question of medically ending an individual's life for his or her good had been debated by philosophers, legal professionals, and medical experts, as they tried to determine whether the practice is appropriate, legal, and ethical. The debate has moved from experts to the general public as the demand and use of medical euthanasia is rapidly gaining momentum in both developed and developing countries. In fact, as noted by Math and Chaturvedi (2012), the demand for medical euthanasia is expected to rise considering there is an increased rate of terminal illnesses associated with lifestyle across the globe. A significant number of people now embrace medical euthanasia, especially due to the increasing prevalence of chronic diseases such as cancer that are associated with chronic pain and high medical cost. Still, some people oppose medical euthanasia, particularly based on ethical and religious grounds. Even though medical euthanasia still raises a lot of concerns, people should embrace it because it benefits individual patients, families, and society at large.
People who have chronic, long-term, and incurable diseases deserve to die in dignity just like any human being. Patients who are suffering from chronic disease like cancer undergo a lot of pain due to changes that occur in the nerves. At the same time, the chronic treatment process is always painful as patients are forced to undergo a lot of surgeries to remove the tumor. The chronic pain is always long-term and not likely to end until the patient dies. Apart from physical pain, people with terminal illnesses go through a lot of emotional pain that is caused by anxiety and fear, resulting in depression or mental problems ( Math & Chaturvedi, 2012) . Therefore, to save patients from endless chronic physical an emotional pain, the society should embrace medical euthanasia and the government should make sure that the practice is legalized.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
No human being should be subjected to endless pain if there is a solution to the problem such as medical euthanasia. Just like people have the right to life, they should enjoy the right to die, especially when life has become meaningless (Math & Chaturvedi, 2012). Also, according to Math and Chaturvedi (2012), medical euthanasia will reduce caregivers’ burden significantly. Persons with terminal illnesses require close attention and supervision, which may be straining and tiresome to caregivers, particularly when there is no hope of recovery. Medical euthanasia will not only save caregivers’ time, but it will also reduce the stress and end emotional pain they always go through while taking care of patients with incurable illnesses.
At the same time, treating and managing incurable diseases is costly, leading to an immense financial burden on family members. For instance, the net monthly cost of treating cancer ranges between $5,238 and $7,710 in the USA, which may be higher in the initial stages of the chronic disease ( Yabroff et al ., 2011) . In 2010, the US government was forced to spend about $124.5 billion to treat cancer patients alone ( Yabroff et al ., 2011) . The high cost of treating and managing incurable diseases can be reduced through the implementation of medical euthanasia. According to the analysis that was done by Trachtenberg & Manns (2017), the government can save about $5.7 billion if the lives of persons with terminal illnesses are shortened by just one month through the use of medical euthanasia. Family members always bear the cost of treatment, and many people cannot afford more than $5,000 to treat patients with incurable. Thus, the level of poverty in many families is likely to increase when society does not embrace medical euthanasia. A research that was conducted by Hoang et al. (2017) revealed that incurable diseases result in the increasing rate of poverty in Vietnam.
However, medical euthanasia has some advantages that should be considered, even though it has many benefits. First, it may be misused by family members and some medical professionals. Many people under duress, distress or chronic pay are not able to make an informed and rational decision. As a result, some people may take advantage of medical euthanasia to involuntarily end the lives of persons with incurable illnesses without seeking their consent. Families, for instance, may seek medical euthanasia if the medical bill is increasing. Secondly, medical euthanasia can be used to achieve malafide intention, which is illegal or dishonest behavior to gain an unfair advantage (Math & Chaturvedi, 2012) . For example, family members can use medical euthanasia with the intention of inheriting the properties of the patient with the incurable illness. However, despite the above concerns, many people now embrace medical euthanasia. It is estimated that about 63% of patients with chronic diseases now prefer medical euthanasia ( Boisvert, 2010) . Hence, it is essential to address concerns raised against medical euthanasia.
In conclusion, people should embrace medical euthanasia because it ensures that patients with incurable diseases die in dignity while at the same time it reduces the social, psychological, and economic burden that may be encountered by family members and caregivers. No human being should be subjected to unnecessary and endless pain and suffering that comes with uncurable ailments. Besides, families should not be exposed to a risk of poverty in an attempt to cure a disease that cannot be treated. Medical euthanasia should be implemented without violating the rights of patients and in accordance with medical/nursing professional ethics and the law.
References
Boisvert, M. (2010). Should physicians be open to euthanasia? YES. Canadian Family Physician , 56 (4), 320-322.
Hoang, V. M., Pham, C. P., Vu, Q. M., Ngo, T. T., Tran, D. H., Bui, D., ... & Mai, T. K. (2017). Household Financial Burden and Poverty Impacts of Cancer Treatment in Vietnam. BioMed Research International , 17(1) .
Math, S. B., & Chaturvedi, S. K. (2012). Euthanasia: the right to life vs. right to die. The Indian Journal of Medical Research , 136 (6), 899-902.
Trachtenberg, A. J., & Manns, B. (2017). Cost analysis of medical assistance in dying in Canada. Canadian Medical Association Journal , 189 (3), 101-105.
Yabroff, K. R., Lund, J., Kepka, D., & Mariotto, A. (2011). Economic burden of cancer in the United States: estimates, projections, and future research. Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention Biomarkers , 20 (10), 2006-2014.
