the assignment

• title

  Is Euthanasia ever morally correct?
• Euthanasia, the practise of purposefully ending a life to reduce suffering, is a moral issue. This is due to the ethical difficulties and dilemmas it raises, and moreover, that there are many factors that can contribute to one’s view on it. It raises moral questions such as: is it ever right to end the life of a terminally ill patient with no hope of recovery? under what circumstances can euthanasia be justified, if at all? is there a moral difference between ending someone’s life and letting them die?
• One difficult aspect when it comes to legalising euthanasia is that it would have a huge impact socially and medically. If legalised, medical professionals may face a larger pressure and obligation to go against their morals to end a life, or could even take advantage of it in cases where euthanasia is not necessary. It could also place an unhealthy expectation on suffering individuals to choose to be euthanised when they do not desire it. Religion and current laws are also elements that contribute to the topic’s morality.
• Recently, the popularity of euthanasia has resurfaced as MPs took a vote in parliament on whether it should be legalised under certain circumstance in England and Wales. Many voted in favour of allowing assisted dying, 330 being for whilst 275 remain against it.
• On one hand, some people may argue that euthanasia is morally wrong and should not be allowed under any circumstances. As palliative care and hospices are available, many believe that euthanasia is a hopeless act. It is possible for the patient to one day find that their life quality has improved in alternative care and they no longer require euthanasia, but many people who request to be euthanised believe there is no alternative.
• Another reason some may argue against euthanasia is the ‘slippery slope’ argument, which suggests that if something such as euthanasia is legalised, this could possibly begin a downward spiral where other supposedly immoral acts are legalised, leading it to become out of control.
• Many also argue that the restrictions of the doctor should be considered. An assumption that the patient has the right to die imposed on doctors a duty to kill. This could go against a doctor‘s hippocratic oath, and place a large burden on their shoulders, which impacts mental health. Additionally, it could lead to dependant patients believing they have a duty to die, even if this is not what they want.
• reasons against belief

  I believe that though there are alternative options and there is a chance it could devolve negatively if not treated delicately, this does not justify taking away one’s choice. This does not make euthanasia any less morally correct, and if proper safeguards are put into place then it should be recognised that euthanasia cannot be forced upon the doctor or patient unless it is truly desired.
• On the other hand, it can be argued that euthanasia is morally acceptable. Firstly, a large benefit surrounding euthanasia is that it spares the loved ones of a patient the pain of seeing their loved one suffer a long, painful death and fade away. Euthanasia is often described to be quick and painless, which could provide a large relief to families.
• arguments for, example

  For instance, Kay Gilderdale was featured in a documentary where she discussed the night she helped her bedridden daughter die. Her daughter desperately requested this and she simply wanted to help her, and yet she was charged. If euthanasia was legalised, this process could have been painless for her daughter and easier for Gilderdale to cope with.
• Additionally, we must consider the patient themselves. Euthanasia enables a person to die with dignity and in control of their situation. When a process is already so frightening and inevitable, a human being should be able to exercise the right of deciding how and when they die.
• some also argue that it would be financially beneficial and provide more expenses to research other illnesses. Euthanasia could release precious resources for others who are desperate for more time. It permits more support for patients who desire but cannot access improved care.
• Arguments for - belief 


  I believe that if a person is in the headspace to decide that they wish to pass on and have their pain relieved, no professional or law enforcer should be able to take this right away and force them to suffer.
• Many religions have varying standpoints on euthanasia. Christians often argue that life is a gift from God and we should respect that. This would mean that as God gave us life and has the right to take that away, no human being has the authority to do so before God decides it is time. Christians also argue that we should respect the sanctity of life, because all human life is made in God’s image. Life should be preserved and human beings should appreciate both their strengths and fallibility.
• One example of this in the Bible is Luke 12: 6-7, which teaches that every life has value and importance to God. “Yet not one sparrow is forgotten by God. Even the hairs on your head have all been counted.”
• Christian beliefs opinion

  Though I can understand where this viewpoint is coming from, I believe that euthanasia is still morally correct and it should still be up to a matter of personal preference. Christians who have this belief have no obligation to be euthanised, but I am certain that the choice should be available for those who do not.
• On the other hand, Buddhists are not unanimous in their view of euthanasia as it was not outwardly dealt with in the Buddha’s teachings. A majority of Buddhists are against involuntary euthanasia, and the most common position is that voluntary euthanasia is wrong. This is because it illustrates that one has allowed physical suffering (dukkha) to overwhelm their mental state. Some would suggest meditation to leave this mindset.
• The intentional ending of life seems forbidden in the Buddha’s teachings, and therefore voluntary euthanasia should be avoided. Shortening life could also impact their kamma (karma), therefore altering their next life and possibly making it worse than their current one. However, Buddhists often wish to extend compassion and understanding to those struggling, and therefore sympathise with those in a position of needing euthanised.
• Alternatively, one non-religious stance on euthanasia is humanism. Though humanists have no fixed response to many ethical dilemmas, a majority of humanists support voluntary assisted dying, if the sickness is incurable. This is often due to two supporting arguments - empathy and autonomy. Humanists often believe that if someone is suffering terrible and you are able to relieve them, then that is reason enough to do so.
• Humanists also believe that we have the right to make decisions, and if we are allowed to choose how to lead our lives then we should be able to decide how to end it. This goes in well with the utilitarian belief ’Greatest Happiness Principle’. This means that when making a decision we should take action that produces the greatest amount of overall happiness and minimises suffering. Legalising euthanasia would lessen suffering for the patients and their struggling families, therefore I believe it is the morally correct choice.
• In my opinion, euthanasia should be legalised and is entirely morally correct. My reasoning for this is that it feels cruel and dictatorial to force someone in an unfortunate situation to continue to live. People facing terminal illnesses often endure immense pain and a loss of dignity, and having the option of euthanasia allows them to end their suffering on their own terms. it respects personal autonomy and acknowledges that every individual has the right to make decisions regarding their own life quality.
• I believe that unless you are the individual or medical professional who will be affected by this choice, then you should not be able to oversee and refuse this decision. If someone has reached a point in their lives where they decide they wish to be euthanised, then this should be permitted after the necessary safety regulations and measures. With these, euthanasia can be a compassionate choice that provides relief not only to patients but also to their families, who may struggle with watching their loved ones fade away.
• Last line

  I believe that no one should be obligated to reach a lower and more painful point in their illness if they wish for the opposite.