Here we go again – THW legalize euthanasia – I hope that at least the new Year1 enjoyed it 🙂
The debate was educational (meaning that it was possible to see few of the don’ts), for example, one should not over-prepare & should listen more to the actual debate..
On paper it looked approximately like this:
- Plan proposed
Allow doctors to seize life of patients who are kept alive with the help of special equipment under following conditions:
– patient’s disease is 100% incurable (at the moment)
– patient agrees to the procedure
– patient undergoes serious red tape procedure
- Gov’t arguments
– Individual right over one’s live. Each individual can decide on how to live her life as well as how to die (remember that suicide is not criminalized in most of the world);
– Under certain circumstances killing is allowed. Even if the act performed by the doctor is named ‘killing’ , it is still allowed as the ‘victim’ is not harmed but rather helped. We punish murders etc. because they are harmful to the victim and the others;
– Ability to use resources for marginally ill people. As the person who is ‘killed’ uses valuable resources (special equipment, attention of stuff etc.), all of this could be given to those patients who are on the edge of curable / incurable disease (marginal patients);
– Relatives have less stress. It is more stressful to see your relative suffering than to acknowledge her death. So it would also be good for relatives if the person would pass away.
- Opp arguments
– Psychological pressure on doctors. Doctors who have to perform the act are forced to do this (as part of their job description). By this innocent people are forced to help others to die thus putting a lot of stress on them;
– Government has the right to decide upon wellbeing of its people. Government can decide that kids should go to school as well as it can decide that the person should still try to live.
What would be your arguments / responses?