Legitimacy of Euthanasia as a Treatment Option for Patients with Terminal Illness - Essay Example

? Legitimacy of Euthanasia as a Treatment Option for Patients with Terminal Illness School Legitimacy of Euthanasia as a Treatment Option for Patients with Terminal Illness Introduction Euthanasia is one of the most debatable topics of social sciences in the present age. Euthanasia means terminating an individual’s life with or without his/her consent. It differs from suicide in which the individual takes his/her life himself/herself without others’ help. In spite of the advancement of technology in all fields including medicine, objective treatment methods for many illnesses have yet not been discovered. Thus, some patients suffer from terminal illness that is described as a disease for which there is no treatment or cure, and is likely to cause the patient’s death in near future. Often, patients in terminal illness have to bear a lot of pain. Terminal illness of the patients is no less painful for their family and friends who are emotionally attached with the patients. The subject of euthanasia raises several moral and ethical concerns (Aramesh and Shadi, 2007, p. 35). This lays the basis of the debate of legitimacy of giving a patient euthanasia in the state of terminal illness. Argument 1 Euthanasia for patients with terminal illness is legitimate as it relieves their pain For The state of terminal illness is undoubtedly painful. The patient knows that he/she is a burden not only upon his/her own self, but also upon his/her family and friends. This feeling makes the patients conscious and makes them feel guilty. The feeling of guilt adds to the pain, suffering, and trauma they are going through in the state of terminal illness, and they start hating themselves even more. The patients themselves want to get rid of such a life more than anybody else. They cannot wait for the death to approach them, and have a strong urge to die. Against Science is advancing continuously and at such a fast pace that procedures introduced today may be unheard of just a day before. Cures and treatments for more and more diseases are being found. The entire focus of the medical researchers and healthcare practitioners is to improve the patients’ experience. One cannot generalize that if the treatment or cure has not been found so far, it will never be found in the future as well. There is a possibility that the patient may be able to live longer by undergoing certain treatment. Besides, there are many blessings of life that people tend to overlook when they are in the state of terminal illness. In the terminal illness, one is so upset and mentally disturbed that one is not able to make informed decision in it. There are many unfinished businesses in the world that require the patients’ consideration that they tend to overlook while deciding for their death. Long story short, the patients might be remorseful for having chosen to die when they could have reverted back to a healthy life with the latest treatments and procedures, but it is too late to regret once euthanasia has been given. Argument 2 Patients with terminal illness are a burden on their family and friends For The family and friends have to pay the patients visit every now and then in order to provide them with company and spend most of their time with them as they are expected to die any time soon. Paying the patient these visits is emotionally, psychologically, and physically demanding for the family and friends as they have to make adjustments in their schedules in order to find time to meet the patient. Those who cannot make it to the hospital because of busy work schedule feel remorseful and thus cannot concentrate upon the work with a clear mind, and this lowers their efficiency, productivity, and quality of work. People cannot sleep properly because of this recurring thought that the patient might die while they are asleep. No rest means no work, and the family and friends have to work really hard to manage everything with the terminal illness of the patient. Against Agreed that paying the patient a visit frequently is emotionally, psychologically, and physically demanding for the family and friends, but that can be compromised upon. The visits of family members and friends are not more important than the life of the patient. If it is too taxing for them, they need to understand that they need to relax a bit because the patient needs time to die or get better. In fact, it would be better for themselves as well as for the patients if they do not visit the patients too often because it would not only save the time and energy of thee visitors, but would also reduce the guilt of the patients that people are adjusting their schedules to find time to meet them. Besides, visiting the patients too frequently or remaining with them all the time is also unnecessary since it hardly does anything to improve the patient’s condition. Irrespective of anything, it is an established fact that nothing including the time and energy of the visitors is as precious as the patient’s life. And in case the patient’s health improves rather than deteriorate because of some wonder or newly discovered medical treatment, it would be a good news for the family and friends as well. So saying that euthanasia in terminal illness is legitimate because it helps the family and friends is totally irrelevant and baseless. Argument 3 Euthanasia in terminal illness is ethical as it helps both the patient and the relatives For From the perspective of the consequentialism theory of ethics, euthanasia in terminal illness is ethical because it increases the net happiness in the world as it not only relieves the patients of all the pain and suffering they are going through in the state of terminal illness, but also saves the time, energy, and resources of the relatives because paying for the patient’s accommodation and medical expenses on daily basis is financially demanding for the relatives in addition to all the emotional trauma they have to undergo. Once the patients are dead, their pain is gone, and so is the need for the relatives to pay them visit or incur expenses for their stay in the hospital. Against Our fundamental source of ethics is religion. The theories of ethics like the utilitarian theory, the consequentialism theory, and the values clarification are often in conflict with one another so that an action reached by considering one theory of ethics is refuted or deemed unethical by another theory of ethics. For example, consequentialism suggests that the nonmoral consequences of letting the patient live in terminal illness are more as compared to euthanasia, so euthanasia in terminal illness is justified. However, the utilitarianism theory of ethics that “states that the moral standard should be promotion of the best long term interests of everyone concerned” (jan.ucc.nau.edu, n.d.), euthanasia in terminal illness may not be justified as it may leave the family and friends with a life-long guilt leading many to commit suicide particularly if the treatment is discovered soon after the patient is given euthanasia. In many cases, the relatives feel this guilt irrespective of the discovery of the treatment because they think that they are responsible for their loved one’s premature death. Likewise, the patient might have opted not to endorse death in the perfect state of mind, and his/her death might have many negative implications on the people he/she worked with. For example, somebody might need his signatures on a cheque which can no longer be obtained once the patient has been given euthanasia. To summarize, we cannot rely upon the theories of ethics to make decisions as important as giving somebody euthanasia in terminal illness. We need to have a solid ground to make such decisions and this ground is provided by religion. All Abrahamic religions condemn all kinds of euthanasia irrespective of the stage of illness, so this leaves no ground for further discussion. “[L]ife is given by God, and only God should decide when to end it” (BBC, 2012). Conclusion For Euthanasia for patients of terminal illness is legitimate as it provides them with relief from the pain and suffering of the illness as well as relieves the financial, psychological, emotional, and physical burden on the relatives, friends and family of the patient. Euthanasia for patients in the state of terminal illness is ethically justified as it puts an end to the suffering of both the patient and the relatives. Against A patient in the state of terminal illness is not in the right state of mind to make informed decisions, so euthanasia should not be given even if it is his/her will. There is always a possibility of healing up either as a miracle or as a result of newly discovered and effective treatment of the illness. Family and friends can visit the patient lesser if frequent visits tire them, but the life of the patient must not be compromised upon. Religious condemns euthanasia in all cases, so it is ethically unjustified. References: Aramesh, K., and Shadi, H. (2007). Euthanasia: An Islamic Ethical Perspective. Iran J Allergy Asthma Immunol. 6 (Suppl. 5): 35-38. BBC. (2012). Ethical problems of euthanasia. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/euthanasia/overview/problems.shtml. jan.ucc.nau.edu. (n.d.). Nine theories of ethics that rule the world. Retrieved from http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~dgs2/theories.pdf. Read More