Talons Philosophy

An Open Online Highschool Philosophy Course

By

Euthanasia

Humans have a right to live, so don’t they have a right to die?

Euthanasia is legal and illegal in multiple different places in the world due to different perspectives of the treatment.

There are three different categories of Euthanasia:


 

1-Voluntary: the patient’s decision

2-Non-Voluntary: parent’s consent

3-Involuntary: without patient’s consent and against the patient’s will


 

This is one of the most debated topics, because some consider it murder or suicide who believe is not the solution therefore should not be legalized. Some think it should be legalized for incurable diseases, or for intense, everlasting pain. It’s your body, it’s your condition, therefore it’s your decision whether you want to die or not.


 

For:

-Dignified dying is a human right; if we have the right to live, we should have the right to die.

-The explicit right to choose their own decision

-Under excruciating pain and suffering, relieving it with death is much less painful

-We’re all human, we have self determination

-This is a human right, it is not harming others

-Everyone has a right to a good death. Patients should not be opposed to when they are choosing to die. Why suffer and die a slow and painful death?


 

Against:

-Respect the life that you have

-Considered “murder” no matter what

Quote by Carrasco de Paula: “Suicide is not a good thing, it is a bad thing because it is saying no to life and to everything it means with respect to our mission in the world and towards those around us.” -Do you agree?


 

Premise 1: “Euthanasia causes people to think that doctors are murderers.

Premise 2: Murder is considered a crime”

Conclusion: “Therefore, euthanasia is a crime.”


 

Premise 1: This is factually correct, although it isn’t necessarily to fitting to everyone. People who are against euthanasia may not think that it’s always the doctor’s fault but rather think that it’s wrong for people to throw away their life so easily.

Premise 2: Factually correct.

Conclusion: This is a valid argument because both premises are true, although there is a slight flaw in premise 1. Therefore, this is not a sound argument.


 

Although I stand somewhere in the middle, I lean more towards the side that it should be legalized. Maybe have an age limit as to when you can decide, possibly having the right to decide starting at the age of 18. Kids who are younger than that age will need parental consent. I am 100% against involuntary euthanasia. It is completely wrong for the doctor to use euthanasia without any consultation of the parents or patient. It is completely understandable that people may think of that as murder. But in the end, we are our own person and we are to make our own decisions. euthanasia is not to be used easily, but I think it should be considered.

Image result for euthanasia

 

7 Responses to Euthanasia

  1. Claire says:

    Hi Ami! I really appreciate hearing your side on this controversial subject –especially since you decided to share both sides. I think that sharing the pros and cons before even stating your logical argument was a smart move so people can fully understand the topic and form their own opinion beforehand. Upon reading your first premise, I am a bit confused; I don’t entirely understand how it ties in with the rest of your argument, as it seems to be about euthanasia and murder, as opposed to doctors and murder. In order for this to be a valid argument, the conclusion would have to derive from the first premise and include the concept of doctors being murderers. You are right in saying that this is in fact not a sound argument. Do you think it is possible for euthanasia to fit in an argument that is both factually correct and valid? Since the lines have so clearly been drawn on this controversial subject, it would be interesting to see where those on the opposing side are coming from. Let me know what you think! I like how you shared your thoughts on euthanasia and proposed some suggestions at the end; it made it seem more personal and really helped me understand where you were coming from.

     
  2. ami says:

    Hey Claire!! Thank you so much for your response.
    I’m glad that the pros and cons that I had written up earlier on the post had helped you understand and comprehend the purpose of Euthanasia much better. I understand that the argument I had put up was not a lot to do with the purpose of Euthanasia and what it’s used for, although I had written that in order to somewhat prevent bias. -If my argument were to be about whether it’s right or wrong, it would’ve had a lot of my perspective and my own beliefs in it, which might’ve made it a more biased statement. In order to avoid that, I used a more understanding method, where the validity comes from the statement of what almost everybody could somewhat agree upon, and think that each premise is factual.
    Anyway I appreciate your feedback!!

     
  3. marina says:

    Hey Ami!
    I really enjoyed reading your post. Its full of dense material, that is beneficial to peoples knowledge. I think it was clever of you to have stated the pros and cons. It really helps the reader understand this topic to a much richer level. If euthanasia becomes legalized, why do you think the age should be 18? If the older generations living in B.C. decided that people under the age of 19 should not be allowed to consume alcohol, why should they be allowed to decide if they take their own life at the age of 18? I’m very interested to hear your thoughts and im looking forward to your reply! Thanks for the post!

     
    • ami says:

      Hi Marina! Thank you so much for your feedback.
      I appreciate your compliments, and I’m glad the pros and cons helped you further understand my topic. The reason as to why I stated the age 18, was because people are considered “adults” at the age of 18, and to be completely honest-I totally forgot that 19 was the actual age of alcohol consumption haha. 18/19 is an adult age, and I think that at that age, you are mature enough to make decisions of your own. If you can have a say and legally decide on which president or prime minister you want to have in your country, you seem like you’re pretty much an “adult”! Therefore you should make decisions of your own for your own well being, thinking of your health and safety. I appreciate your response, Marina! The age that I wrote down wasn’t actually something that I had really looked into and no one has really mentioned it so thanks for making me aware :)

       
  4. yuryv says:

    Hi Ami, I found your argument/post incredibly interesting. It is such a tough subject to discuss, especially when the matter is between: the right to choosing LEGALLY whether to be Alive or Deceased.

    I found it very powerful how you supported the argument: “Dignified dying is a human right; if we have the right to live, we should have the right to die.”
    I’m curious as to what you think about providing assisted suicide to minors, if they struggle with mental or physical illness but their parents provide consent.. should they still be able to go through with Assisted Suicide? Curious to hear your thoughts.

    I learned a lot of new points and views to consider about such a delicate topic, so thank you for enlightening me.
    Yury

     
    • ami says:

      Hey Yury, thank you so much!
      Your comments mean a lot and I am appreciative of your thoughts. To answer your question, I completely believe that if the parents have decided for the treatment to be used, the minor is struggling a nearly incurable illness (physical and/or mental) they should definitely have the right to make the decision of going off early. As for why, I think that it is damaging to the human health to be living in absolute pain. Now; the negative aspect of this is that this might become overlooked as an “easy” decision or the “easy way out” especially if the patient were to be dealing with suicidal thoughts. Wishing that was preventable, being in almost unbearable pain, feeling so low and struggling to find an escape, euthanasia should be an option. I do think that this shouldn’t EVER be the first decision that anybody makes, because this is NOT a light situation. If this treatment were to be legalized, it should have some limits to an extent. Certain illnesses having a certain amount of time, treatments, doctors, pain, tests ..etc before the patient decides on this medication. Those are my thoughts but I’d love to hear yours too! Thanks again, greatly appreciate your kind worded comment.

       
  5. Kamakshi says:

    Hi Ami! I really enjoyed reading your ideas about this sensitive issue, it is an unfortunate reality for some who have to make this decision that questions moral and ethical standards, our value for life, and the extent to which we have the power to make this decision for ourselves, and in some cases, for others. Your post is engaging and I appreciate your sensitivity to discuss the topic from both perspectives, discussing conflicting opinions factually before introducing your argument. Although your premises highlight ideas against euthanasia labeling it as murder, I liked how you conveyed your personal stance on the issue in your conclusion, arguing that if we have the right to live, we have the right to die, “But in the end, we are our own person and we are to make our own decisions. Euthanasia is not to be used easily, but I think it should be considered.” I’m curious to know what you think about to what extent euthanasia should be considered, where would you draw the line when it comes to having it as an option? Looking forward to hearing your thoughts, thank you for your post!

     

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

css.php