Closing statement for euthanasia debate. The Argument for Assisted Suicide 2022-11-16
Closing statement for euthanasia debate Rating:
7,7/10
1558
reviews
Euthanasia, also known as assisted suicide, is a controversial and emotionally charged topic that elicits strong feelings and opinions on both sides of the debate. On one hand, proponents of euthanasia argue that it is a compassionate and dignified way for terminally ill individuals to end their suffering and attain a peaceful death. On the other hand, opponents argue that euthanasia is unethical, goes against the sanctity of life, and can be abused or misused.
After considering both sides of the argument, it is clear to me that the benefits of euthanasia outweigh the potential risks and drawbacks. While it is true that euthanasia can be abused or misused, there are ways to mitigate these risks through proper safeguards and regulations. For example, strict criteria can be put in place to ensure that only those who are truly suffering and terminally ill are eligible for assisted suicide.
Furthermore, the right to die with dignity is a fundamental human right, and it is cruel to force someone to endure unbearable suffering simply because of the moral objections of others. In these cases, euthanasia can be a merciful and humane option that allows individuals to choose their own path and end their suffering on their own terms.
In conclusion, while the euthanasia debate is a complex and sensitive issue, I believe that it is ultimately a matter of personal choice and autonomy. Those who are suffering and terminally ill should have the right to decide how they wish to spend their final days, and euthanasia can be a compassionate and dignified way for them to do so.
Euthanasia Conclusion
One of the most well known arguments presented by advocates of assisted suicide is the right to die. All three of these types of statements share similar qualities, however. For example, the patient is in a coma, is senile and or has brain damage. It is an adjective used to describe a successful death. Euthanasia is defined as the intentional termination of life by another at the request of the person who is to receive their right to die, instead of dying naturally.
By 2017, a Gallup poll found a large shift in attitudes in the United States. For example, your professor may want you to state a counter-argument and include a refutation paragraph. Moreover one never knows when a new treatment may be available to cure a terminal illness. The patient as well as family members ought to be relieved of the accompanying financial burden Buse 8. The oath encourages doctors to care for and never harm those under their care. The future medicine could promote euthanasia as a form of health care cost containment.
This includes asking for help with dying, refusing medical treatment. Withholding treatment is not carrying out surgery that will extend life for a short time. People also believe that Euthanasia is inevitable anyway, and so it would be better for it to be carried out safely in order to prevent accidents. Patients must make two oral and one written request for euthanasia and there must be at least 15 days between the first and the last request. Human beings have the right to die when and how they want to. Physician-assisted suicide could be the answer for the select few patients who meet strict requirements and who are in need of relief. Euthanasia and the Common Law.
They differ where they place the line that separates relief from dying--and killing. That is one of the reasons that physician-assisted suicide is such a complex topic. Should human beings have the right to decide on issues of life and death? Is it the pet who has decided to die? The issue of euthanasia has ignited heated debate among the professionals as well as the law makers and the general public Otlowski 211. Euthanasia can be carried out either by taking actions, including giving a lethal injection or by not doing what is necessary to keep a person alive such as failing to keep their feeding tube going. Others believe that euthanasia is not only permissible but proper, providing it is voluntary, based on full information, and is restricted to those suffering serious pain and close to What few would support is assisted suicide for reasons other than to end great suffering of the terminally Arguments Against Euthanasia Euthanasia the assisted killing of a terminal patient is a controversial topic that medical professionals cannot avoid. Administering euthanasia is not, they say, an easier option for caregivers than providing palliative care, as some critics suggest.
A closing statement must be persuasive, because it is delivered by one who supports a particular side of an argument. And they should have the right to refuse medical treatment. A Fictional Closing Statement Example: A closing statement often proves to be the most dramatic or memorable part of the legal process. God only knows when a life will end who are we to end a life thinking it to have reached its end. Please find our free samples below with the best ideas for your works! States throughout the country and the government need to revise their beliefs about an assisted death and consider the amount of benefits it provides life-threatening patients. Moreover if a women going through depression is being encouraged to commit suicide and some doctor is assigned to make up her mind for it then how can we judge whether it was a voluntary euthanasia out of the ladies own will or something which she was encouraged to do y her practitioner. The patient of doctor may propose euthanasia as the better treatment alternative.
Closing Statement Example: Presenting a Legal Argument
However, most physicians have not been trained on pain management and hence the patients are usually left in excruciating pain Johnstone 249. Even if they were to be given homecare, a lot of time resource and facilities would be overstretched. So, implementing euthanasia would mean many unlawful deaths that could have well survived later. Euthanasia is a topic of ongoing debate. Terminally ill patients in hospitals imply that facilities would be put under great pressure at the expense of other patients who would benefit from using the same services.
Euthanasia Debates: For and Against Free Essay Example
Is there a moral difference between killing someone and letting them die? The concept of justice and punishing those who have done wrong is inherently exciting for people, and fictional books and television shows play off that excitement all the time. Indeed, both sides have pertinent points when it comes to understanding and assessing the conflict, but euthanasia supporters have a significantly stronger argument when considering the bigger picture. Gay-Williams states that euthanasia is inherently and morally wrong. Where the assistance of the physician is intentionally and deliberately directed at enabling an individual to end his or her own life, the physician acts unethically. We do not have to kill the patient to kill the symptoms. During the first three years, only around 2 people a month used this to end their lives.
Pain and suffering are as a result of several factors; these include psychosocial, cultural and spiritual. If one argues that people truly have the right to die as they wish, then the option of palliative care must be explored before assisted suicide can even be considered. By forbidding euthanasia, we prevent the right to liberty of decision. Princeton University Press, 2009, Pp. The opening words establish the tone for the dialogue and should include the viewpoint, claim, or notion you wish to defend as well as a brief summary of your supporting evidence. From simple essay plans, through to full dissertations, you can guarantee we have a service perfectly matched to your needs. There are two systems of legalized euthanasia.
How To End a Debate: Learn to Conclude and Make a Closing Statement
This is definitely not the case as by practicing euthanasia we will be going against the nature. On the other hand, critics claim that the act of euthanasia is nothing more than a fabricated form of murder. In many cases, doctors will provide people with a drug they can take to end their life. The argument presupposes that such patients need to be prevented from dyeing through any possible means. Learn More The laws guiding the practice of euthanasia in the state of Oregon are quite clear.
It is not required by law or medical ethics that a patient should be kept alive by all means. The disease may lose its autonomy to the patient, making him dependent on others so humiliating and making him lose his self-esteem. The subject euthanasia is a highly controversial and divisive topic raising an array of sophisticated moral. Finally, there is assisted suicide. Healthcare providers are faced with ethical dilemmas when caring for terminally ill patients. This person is likely experiencing persistent and unending suffering. A closing statement can, and sometimes does, sway the outcome of a trial.
