Euthanasia Case

Euthanasia, from the Greek words meaning "good death", is the practice of taking steps specificially intended to terminate the life of a sick or suffering person. Involuntary Euthanasia inflicted irrespective of the wishes of the patient is rightly condemned by all parties to the contemporary debate which is concerned rather with voluntary euthanasia, administered to a terminally ill patient at his or her request, or at elast with his or her consent. The law now permite doctors to withdraw treatment from a terminally ill patient knowing that the lack of treatment will hasten death, or to administer high dosages of drigs with the intention of relieving pain knowing that the high dosage will certainly cause death.

But even voluntary euthanasia is regarded by the law in almost all jurisdictions as a serious crime. (not anymore). The Euthanasia debate centres on the question of whether voluntary euthanasia should be legalized. The main argument advanced by the opposition is that the practice is simply morally and cruel. Why force a person to undergo a degrading and painful death, when the end is inevitable and they themselves request a speedy and dignified exist? Do we not treat even our animals more humanely, putting them out of their misery when there is nothing more we can do?

A second argument we might call the Argument from Civil Liberties: its case is that in a free society the law has no business in preveneting a citizen from performing any action they may choose, provided it s not an action which will cause harm to others. Nor does the law have any business preventing others from helping citizens to do something they are entitled to do. Since the terminally ill do not harm others by ending their lives, they should be legally permitted to do so, as should others to assist them to carry out their wishes if they are unable to do so themselves.