Should Euthanasia Be Legalized?

Should Euthanasia Be Legalized?

Euthanasia, a term derived from the Greek word meaning good death, refers to the act of intentionally terminating a life with the intent to relieve suffering or pain (Fenigsen). Commonly referred to as mercy killing, euthanasia is widely performed on terminally ill patients, usually with the consent of the victim or the family members. The practice has its roots in the ancient Greek and roman civilizations. Euthanasia was approved by the authorities in these ancient civilizations, and was used to alleviate the pain of the suffering. As Christianity permeated these cultures, sanctity and sacredness of life was embraced, and euthanasia became less popular (Fenigsen).

Over the centuries, euthanasia has been contemned and condemned by the mainstream society, but it has continually been practiced in private. It is only at the turn of the 20th century that prominent groups emerged advocating for the adoption of euthanasia. The first advocacy group for euthanasia was called the Voluntary Euthanasia Society, formed in 1935 by a group of London doctors. In the United States, the first pro-euthanasia society was formed in 1938. Known as the Hemlock Society, it supports individuals' decisions to die and offers support to such people. The emergence of these groups was countered by the rise of anti-euthanasia groups such as the American medical association (Masci). These opposing groups have fronted some very compelling arguments for their cause, which ought to be analyzed to determine their validity.

The opponents of euthanasia base their principal argument on the fact that euthanasia violates the fundamental principle upon which medicine was founded, which is saving lives. In their book, "Euthanasia-A-Critique", Peter Singer and Mark Sielger present a strong case against euthanasia. They opine, "Although the relief of pain is the core goal of medicine, euthanasia violates the fundamental standards of traditional medicine." According to their essay, pain control is the biggest concern to terminally ill patients (McGee 27). While this is not false, it is not entirely true. Apart from physical pain, terminally ill patients experience a lot of emotional turmoil. The assertion by singer and sielger that "physical pain can ultimately be relieved with the use of analgesic agents" fails to consider conditions where patients are drugged to the extent of not being able to act according to their free will. When a person loses the will to speak or act for him or herself, it constitutes stripping of that person's dignity.

Perhaps the most vocal opponent of euthanasia is the religious community. Religious groups base their views on religious principles, which hold that life is sacred in the eyes of God, and should be treated thus by humanity (Fenigsen). When euthanasia is viewed exclusively from a Judeo-Christian perspective, it is termed murder. The ten-commandment rule which states that "thou shall not kill" is invoked when condemning euthanasia. According to religious groups, euthanasia is a form of suicide, which demeans the intrinsic value of human life. Another valid argument that they make is that by legalizing euthanasia, some members of society will devalue the lives of those that are weak, such as the sick and the old, and would be more willing to terminate their lives. Further, religious groups hold that since the law is founded on fundamental principles of morality which are derived from religious faith, legalizing euthanasia constitutes a contravention of the moral laws upon which the law is founded (McGee 17).

Proponents of euthanasia, while not wholly rejecting the arguments fronted by religious groups, point to the same religious texts while advocating for euthanasia. The sacred texts promote man's free will in charting his destiny; therefore, to deny a patient the God-given right to decide whether to live or not violate the tenets of religion. Another argument made by proponents of euthanasia is that the golden rule stated by Jesus, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you," compels