The issue of euthanasia is one of the most controversial in the world, but I personally think that it is really quite simple.

Euthanasia is about freedom of choice. It is about unnecessarily prolonging life, causing pain and suffering to the patient. If the patient wishes to die, as long as the wish is justified by his suffering of a terminal and excruciating disease, it ought to be ok for him to undergo euthanasia.

Euthanasia is also about economics. In many countries, brain dead patients are taken as patients who are unable to express their opinions, and hence, euthanasia is not to be conducted. Who then foots the bill? They have life support and hospital care, so a brain dead patient can be very costly indeed, to the detriment of the family or the taxpayers. Are brain dead patients ever going to recover from their state? Once they are declared brain dead, they are as good as an empty shell, nothing more. Is it then meaningful for their lives to be prolonged artificially? I think not.

How is the use of euthanasia unethical? Doctors administering the procedure can be condemned as having “killed” someone, but as far as I am concerned, that is largely a religious and dogmatic argument that is out of step for the demands of modern times. Euthanasia can be abused, no doubt, but euthanasia can also do great good for patients, or for a patient’s family. In any case, there is such a thing as suicide tourism: the banning of euthanasia is pointless when anyone who wants to die can simply travel to Ireland, Cambodia and Switzerland for “assisted suicide”.

Nevertheless, euthanasia should only be used when the patient is as good as dead, or when the patient expressed a wish to die while suffering a terminal and painful disease. As long as these guidelines for euthanasia are adhered to, I don’t see why it should be opposed.
09:16
0 Comments | Post/Read comment