Euthanasia, also known as humane killing, refers to intentionally ending one’s life to relieve the individual from long-term suffering. Euthanasia has a vital role in participating in society; thus, it should be re-evaluated as a solution to the willingly ending of long-term pain. In modern society, Euthanasia can provide an alternative for most people who finally end-up committing suicide.
Avery, A. L. E. X. (2013). Convenience euthanasia’. But at what cost to all involved. Vet Times , 1-10.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Avery (2013) discusses Euthanasia in a study on a paralleled basis to the destruction of a country's economy. This study is not current but has substantive information useful for euthanasia-based reference. Also, Euthanasia ensures that economic losses are minimized on cases where the patient's healing is limited. Avery explains that a patient should not be fixed to any option; however, the patient's decision should be made without being influenced by the physician. The research work does not qualify as a scholarly article; yet, it has high popularity among the public and can affect the decision made towards legalizing Euthanasia. This study allies with my thesis statement sentiments that the legalization of Euthanasia should be enforced or even passed as a law.
Dutch, A. D. (2020). Should Active Euthanasia Be Morally and Legally Permissible? Sound Decisions: An Undergraduate Bioethics Journal , 5 (1), 1.
Dutch 2020 explains how moral permissibility of Euthanasia has not yet been accepted amongst many cities in America; however, the topic remains to be hotly discussed among Americans and globally. This source is up to date and reputable since it does not provide obsolete information; this ensures that we access the best information free from errors or misinterpretation. Despite being current, the study qualifies for use during reference purposes because it has substantial evidence-based research on the legalization of Euthanasia.
The source is aligned with my opinion, as stated in the thesis statement, that legalization of Euthanasia will reduce the rates of suicide and perhaps provide a solution to other pre-existing conditions. By employing rule-utilitarian ethics, this source offers substantial evidence and reasons why Euthanasia should not be treated as an illegal activity. This source uses utilitarian ethics to bring up the point of doing actions that result in the maximization of the goof of everyone involved. Consequently, to better understand Euthanasia, the study focused on the advantages that will result from legalizing or making euthanasia permissibility.
There is adequate information on the limitations that might accrue from legalizing Euthanasia discussed as well as the ethical and moral considerations that are part and parcel of Euthanasia. The source has gained a lot of popularity and also emphasizes the impacts of euthanasia legalization financially and economically. This refers to Euthanasia's ability to bring to an end long-term suffering, but on the basis that an agreement is reached between the patient and family relatives.
Karlsson, M., Milberg, A., & Strang, P. (2012). Suffering and Euthanasia: a qualitative study of dying cancer patients' perspectives. Supportive Care in Cancer , 20 (5), 1065-1071.
Despite not being current, this research provides an excellent study of the importance of Euthanasia to long-term suffering cancer patients. In the literature review, Karlsson, Milberg and Strang (2012) elucidate that little information is known concerning suffering cancer-patients and mental tortures that they go through. According to the study, some long-term cancer patients hold a firm stand that Euthanasia would better serve them compared to the suffering they have to endure. The research design conducted also brought onboard numerous baseline studies that are equally relevant when making sound decisions concerning the legalization of Euthanasia.
The research was reputable and authoritative for encompassing quantitative research designs, in-depth interviews, oral reviews on why Euthanasia has more merits thus should be legalized. The study also touches on the ethical perspective of Euthanasia by outsourcing views from the selected participants. Ostensibly, the results obtained were analyzed using quantitative content analysis to minimize the chances of error. However, one limitation of the study was that no pre-determined categories had been made for evaluation after results have been analyzed.
This study aligns with my opinion, as stated in my thesis statement, that Euthanasia should be advocated for since it is a personal choice. However, the study makes substantial claims that the fact that a patient has been suffering does not necessarily qualify the patient for Euthanasia. It has to be a decision done out of self-dignity and not with external parties' influence.
Le Glaz, A., Berrouiguet, S., Kim-Dufor, D. H., Walter, M., & Lemey, C. (2019). Euthanasia for mental suffering reduces stigmatization but may lead to an extension of this practice without safeguards. The American Journal of Bioethics , 19 (10), 57-59.
Le Gaz et al. (2019) position their argument on the relationship between Euthanasia and stigmatization. Printed in 2019, this source is current, thus provides a systematic review of recent evidence-based information on the reasons why Euthanasia should not be categorized as a form of committing suicide. Information contained in this study is based on a review done on online scholarly books and journals which are reputable. Additionally, the study provides current data as it was conducted last year.
On the other hand, Le Gaz and colleagues also emphasize the physical and psychological conditions that influence the patient's decision making. This involves explaining all the information that the physician should take the patient through before leaving him or her to make a personal decision. The study has gone through rigorous scrutiny by experts to omit any misinformation that might cause credibility issues.
The study is in line with my opinion that Euthanasia should be provided under special occasions and by specialized well-trained physicians. Besides, it also backs up my introduction sentiments that the media should not only focus on the negatives associated with Euthanasia, but also tremendous merits.
Nikookar, H. R., & Sooteh, S. H. J. (2014). Euthanasia: an Islamic ethical perspective. European Scientific Journal .
According to Nikookar and Sooteh (2014), Euthanasia is an all-round heated topic and requires special attention from every corner of religion. This study was conducted several years back; it is not current; however, the study has essential and authoritative information that qualifies it as a peer-review journal. The study is supported by strong methodological reviews that were conducted after research was designed. It encompasses numerous ideas that are also implicated in other evidence-based research studies.
Besides, this study has formed a strong background of baseline studies on the literature review provided. The study mostly focused on an Islamic perspective of how the issue of Euthanasia should be handled. According to the obtained results, the research was very relevant and proved to be beneficial financially, suffering wise, and following ethical and moral perspectives.
Last but not least, this research is relevant and associates with my thesis statement, thus supporting the legalization of Euthanasia. The study also denotes the historical value and change, which might be brought up through the legalization of Euthanasia. Quantitative results that were analyzed indicate that most people are not against Euthanasia, but the fact that they understand it as a form of suicide makes people seem skeptical.
In summary, Euthanasia offers an effective and affordable way of ending long-term suffering on patients. Consequently, it should be legalized to help people save on extra costs that can cater to other financial and beneficial needs.
References
Avery, A. L. E. X. (2013). Convenience euthanasia’. But at what cost to all involved. Vet Times , 1-10. https://www.vettimes.co.uk/app/uploads/wp-post-to-pdf-enhanced-cache/1/convenience-euthanasia-but-at-what-cost-to-all-involved.pdf
Dutch, A. D. (2020). Should Active Euthanasia Be Morally and Legally Permissible? Sound Decisions: An Undergraduate Bioethics Journal , 5 (1), 1. https://soundideas.pugetsound.edu/sounddecisions/vol5/iss1/1/
Karlsson, M., Milberg, A., & Strang, P. (2012). Suffering and Euthanasia: a qualitative study of dying cancer patients' perspectives. Supportive Care in Cancer , 20 (5), 1065-1071. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00520-011-1186-9
Le Glaz, A., Berrouiguet, S., Kim-Dufor, D. H., Walter, M., & Lemey, C. (2019). Euthanasia for mental suffering reduces stigmatization but may lead to an extension of this practice without safeguards. The American Journal of Bioethics , 19 (10), 57-59. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15265161.2019.1654019
Nikookar, H. R., & Sooteh, S. H. J. (2014). Euthanasia: an Islamic ethical perspective. European Scientific Journal . https://ris.utwente.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/5533648/MIFS2014.Vol.2.pdf#page=189
