well ive recently finished an essay on euthanasia discussing wether or not it should be legal so ive decided to bring this argument to sythe heres a link to some information on it for those of you who dont know the different types etc http://www.pregnantpause.org/euth/types.htm what do you think should it be legalised or remain illegal? (although most forms of euthanasia are legal in the netherlands and australias northern territory) EDIT: Voluntary Euthanasia is to intentionally kill a person for sympathetic purposes. This is where the patient requests to end his or her life. The victim is killed by direct action such as a lethal injection or failing to perform the necessary actions to maintain life. Another alternative to this is assisted suicide were a person wishes to die and is provided with the substances to do so. For example, if a doctor provides the patient with a needle and an overdose of drugs with full knowledge of what will happen if they inject the given drugs. A more “inhumane†method is nonvoluntary euthanasia. This involves the killing of a person who cannot express if they wish to die because the victim either suffers from a mental disorder (severely mentally deficient such as suffering dementia), is in a coma or infancy, for example newborns. Involuntary euthanasia is when a person performs euthanasia on the victim against his or her wishes. This form is considered wrong and equates to murder. i decided to add this too
The website being called "Pregnant Pause" does not mean that everything on it is about abortion. Actually visit the link next time. I think euthanasia should be avoided at all costs, but if there really is no recourse, a person should be able to choose the moment of their own death.
i dont think people are actually visiting the link? (thanks shredder you actually read it ) this really has nothing to do with abortions heres another interesting link: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1125028 sorry about the double post but sheesh dont let this thread die its an important issue
i suppose but what if theyre unable to take counselling for example with infants and "vegetables" its imposible to comunicate with them properly, this is where nonvoluntary euthanasia comes in
I agree with the dutch supreme court, should only be used as a last resort, from classified diseases that "qualify" for euphanasia
passive euthanasia is wrong, doctors should try to save the person, its their job. active euthanasia is right in some ways, 1. The person asks to be put out of their misery humanely. 2. They person is terminally ill, and their family doesnt have the money to keep him/her on life support. 3. The person is a wanted and dangerous criminal and which would have died anyway do to a death penalty or a life sentence.
Well people who are terminally ill, such as people with certain cancers, don't always die. Sometimes when they are supposed to die in 12 months or whatever, the disease or whatever it is that is potentially causing their death just goes away. It is not completely unheard of. Who's to say that if they waited their illness wouldn't just go away for no reason whatsoever and then they could live another 10, 20, or more years happily? That's a problem I see with euthanasia. ilikepie1 your number 3 isn't actually euthinasia, it's just capital punishment, any way you look at it.
yeah, u can say that. but what i meant with terminally ill ppl, if they have the money to keep them in treatment, then they shouldnt be killed humanely. But for poorer families, they dont really have a choice. Either pulling the plug, or risking poverty. If i was a terminally ill patient coming from a poor family, i would want to die so my family can live.
Voluntary Euthanasia is to intentionally kill a person for sympathetic purposes. This is where the patient requests to end his or her life. The victim is killed by direct action such as a lethal injection or failing to perform the necessary actions to maintain life. Another alternative to this is assisted suicide were a person wishes to die and is provided with the substances to do so. For example, if a doctor provides the patient with a needle and an overdose of drugs with full knowledge of what will happen if they inject the given drugs. A more “inhumane†method is nonvoluntary euthanasia. This involves the killing of a person who cannot express if they wish to die because the victim either suffers from a mental disorder (severely mentally deficient such as suffering dementia), is in a coma or infancy, for example newborns. Involuntary euthanasia is when a person performs euthanasia on the victim against his or her wishes. This form is considered wrong and equates to murder. This is the foreword taken from my essay. This will help clear things up abit.
That's even worse than people posting on videos "haha funny video" XD I think passive is bad, but active is alright, at the "victim's" consent If you want to die,... you should get it
