Ethics final paper

Ethics final paper - Arunabh Sinha (sinhaa@rider.edu)...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Arunabh Sinha (sinhaa@rider.edu) PHL-202 Social Philosophy Professor Heit Rider University The practice of euthanasia has posed a question of morality and ethicality which has been a major topic of controversy for centuries. It raises the issue of whether a terminally ill person should suffer torturing and lingering pain before death, or if they should be given the choice of peaceful and painless death. The euthanasia controversy is part of a larger issue concerning the right to die and all of us are morally entitled to end our lives when we see fit. Early practices of euthanasia have been traced back to the ancient Roman and Greek Empires. In their beliefs the ancient Greeks and Romans did not consider life needed to be preserved at any cost and tolerant of suicide in cases where no relief could be offered to the dying. In society, euthanasia can be viewed in two different forms; passive and active. Passive euthanasia involves a terminally ill person to do nothing to prevent his or her death and allowing himself or herself to die. On the contrary, active euthanasia involves a request by the dying patient or that person’s legal representative to have a physician inject a lethal dose of a drug to kill the person. Active euthanasia is the more controversial of the two and is currently illegal in the United States. The attempt to legalize euthanasia has lead to the “right to die” movement which states that such laws violate the people’s privacy and rights. This movement was led by Dr. Jack Kevorkian who believes people have a right to avoid a lingering, miserable death by ending their own lives with help from a physician who can ensure that they die peacefully. Dr. Jack Kevorkian respected requests from the patient and illustrated rebellion against such laws
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
which strip people of the right to choose their own fate. The state of Oregon protects the laws of active euthanasia and provides a choice with the Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act, which allows prescriptions of lethal doses of a drug to be self - administered by the patient under strict circumstances and procedures. Making active euthanasia in the United States illegal sparked debates of whether it violates our Human Rights Act and has also gained worldwide attention in countries including the Netherlands and Australia. The majority of society supports the idea behind the question; which comes first, rights or needs? And argue that our rights our crucial to the quality of life. Active euthanasia has been a controversial issue in the United States and was made illegal throughout the nation except in the state of Oregon. The state of Oregon passed an Oregon Death with Dignity Law in 1997 and became the first and only state to legalize
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 04/07/2008 for the course PHIL 202 taught by Professor Hyat during the Fall '07 term at Rider.

Page1 / 6

Ethics final paper - Arunabh Sinha (sinhaa@rider.edu)...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online