Collaborative writing Assignment against Euthanasia - Essay Example

Collaborative writing Assignment against Euthanasia The debate on euthanasia has attracted mixed reactions across the world with significant opposition within the religious cycles and the society in general. The constitutions of various nations uphold the respect to human life and therefore disregard this practice. There are several factors that make this medical practice unethical and inhuman. In the religious tenets human life is in the hands of a supreme being who is the almighty God and a fellow man has no authority to end the life of another.

As such religious faith is a strong opponent of this practice under any circumstances. Besides, there are critical aspects of medical profession that need to be taken into consideration as far as doctor’s role in physician-assisted suicide is concerned (Jeffrey 76-8). The society put their trust on doctors as having moral responsibility of keeping the patients in state of life in line with their Hippocratic Oath. There are several arguments that attract the opposition against Euthanasia that seems real if given critical analysis.

Legalizing euthanasia will create a legal loophole that can be misused by the doctors in regard to physician-assisted suicide. One such legal aspect is possible “slippery slope” from the process of euthanasia to murder. This will particularly target the poor and disabled people who may not sustain prolonged medical monitoring condition and expensive medical bills. The principle of life requires sustained help and medical support to an individual with the cardinal goal of saving life. In this respect, the aspect of socio-economic ability is not considered (Kopelman 87-9).

However, in reality medical cost for some conditions requires funds which may exhaust a family and render the hospital or doctors financially incapacitated to continue offering services. For the poor and the handicap, this may compel the doctors to initiate physician-assisted suicide as a way of eliminating the cost factor. There is possible legal incentive that this doctor’s right may create to the insurance firms that may resort to termination of life with the aim of saving money. This is unfair and highly unethical in line with the common moral tenets of businesses practices and medical code of ethics.

The aspect of deliberate killing of the poor and the disabled if this practice is legalized evokes the concept of Ethics which can effectively convince the proponents to think otherwise. According to Jeffrey (pg.20), “Clearly, it would be unwise to give doctors the power to issue lethal prescriptions for the assisted suicide if they lack the empathy necessary to explore the suffering of a dying patient “and this clearly reflects ethical concerns of the issue. Various authors that write against euthanasia like Keown (pg .23) brings out the aspect of logical aspect which gives a clear picture of the potential risk the society faces if this practice is not given critical consideration by the society.

Euthanasia has faced considerable dismissal in various parts of the world with several United States imposing strict anti- physician-assisted killing law. For this argument against euthanasia to make more appeal to the society, the mode of presenting the ideas needs to incorporate the emotional aspect of rhetoric tool. A good example of this can be seen in the authorship of Kopelman (pg.18), “thus suicide opposes the purpose of his creator…..” statement which paints a sense of sympathy towards victims of euthanasia.

Works citedJeffrey, David. Against Physician Assisted Suicide: A Palliative Care Perspective. Oxford: Radcliffe Pub, 2009. Print.Keown, John. Euthanasia, Ethics, and Public Policy: An Argument against Legislation. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Print.Kopelman, Loretta M. Physician-assisted Suicide: What Are the Issues?Dordrecht [u.a.: Kluwer Acad. Publ, 2001. Print.