Assisted Suicide - Ramon Sampedro - Essay Example

He jumped into the sea and struck his head on the bottom of the sea, making him paralyzed. Ramona Maneiro was involved in the last step of the process of assisted suicide that led to the death of Ramon Sampedro. It is evident that Maneiro had a role and ethical right to facilitate Sampedro’s assisted suicide. In as much as the concept of assisted suicide presents several challenges, it is crucial to acknowledge the importance of adhering to the needs of the victims while adhering to the tenets of the law.

Maneiro acted based on love by agreeing to participate in assisted suicide. She noted 7 years later that she acted based on love. Maneiro had a relationship with Sampedro that lasted for many years. After living a bedridden life, Sampedro began struggling for his right to end his life. The only person who could understand his situation and challenges was Maneiro. It is essential to note that Sampedro could not commit suicide by himself because of his quadriplegic condition (Manning 21). Maneiro acted by following the utilitarian and Kantianism principles.

The principles of utilitarianism dictate that human actions should lead to happiness (Manning 41). By assisting Sampedro in committing suicide, Maneiro was accomplishing her obligations of ensuring that her fellow human was relieved of pain and suffering that he was experiencing. For 29 years, Sampedro lived a life of suffering following his paralysis. He had to depend on other people for basic human activities and needs. He lived a bedridden life afflicted with an excruciatingly painful and terminal condition that left him permanently incapable of living a dignified human life.

In order to assist Sampedro in committing suicide, Maneiro was accomplishing her obligations under utilitarianism. Sampedro looked forward to a life of satisfaction and minimum suffering. However, his quadriplegic state could not let him live such a life. Having lived with Sampedro for many years, Maneiro understood his situation and experiences. Additionally, Sampedro mercifully begged for an end to his painful life. Maneiro could not turn down these pleas given the fact that she knew him and understood his suffering.

It would have been cruel and inhumane for Maneiro to turn down such pleas from a suffering man. According to the requirements for compassion, an individual should cooperate and comply with the pleas of a suffering person. Additionally, Sampedro has moral rights to ask for an end of his life. Additionally, Maneiro has the moral right of helping somebody overcome the suffering in his life. The two individuals have a right to choose freely and not inflict harm in each other’s life. Sampedro indicated expressly that he wanted an end to his life.

The right of free choices included the right to end one’s life when necessary. Additionally, a person needs to opt to end his life (Manning 17). In my opinion, Maneiro chose to respect the wishes of Sampedro to end his life. Opponents of the actions taken by Maneiro argue that the society has a right to protect the life of anybody. This means that Maneiro failed to protect the life of Sampedro. Additionally, they state that Maniero should have played a role in preserving the life of Sampedro.

Therefore, assisting Sampedro in committing suicide violates the fundamental roles and duties of respecting and preserving life. This means that a society committed to protect and preserve life should not destroy it (Manning 21).