Doctors Have the Right to Euthanize Patients

Name

Institution

Doctors Have the Right to Euthanize Patients

Introduction

Euthanasia can be understood in many different ways. Those who argue against it claim that it is morally and ethically wrong to give drugs to patients which are intended to kill them, despite their critical conditions. Others interpret that the doctor can convince the patient to accept the assisted suicide, but the patient can be making the decision under his or her conscience or consent. Opponents often explain that it is a form of “life terminating experience”, and not a way to taking a life of another at a latter expressed request; due to the patient’s unbearable health conditions that make them unable to persevere the suffering. Whichever the arguments that have been made, it is important for one to understand the meaning of the term euthanasia. Euthanasia refers to the shortening of a person’s dying process by use of medication such as the sedatives. Euthanasia is sometimes considered as recommendable, even in the absence of discomfort, and it when used under the consent of the relatives and the loved ones of the patient; it improves the quality of the dying process. Such arguments validate the practice of euthanasia and as some proponents have argued that it is acceptable since it concerns an action which dying is the result and the purpose (Green & Palpant, 2014). Although some people think that the doctors should not have the right to practice euthanasia to patients, in this essay, I will show that doctors have the right to euthanasia, and I will briefly explain three points to support my opinion.

Doctors Have the Right to Euthanize Patients

Some people think that euthanasia violates nature’s rules that even doctors do not have the right to deprive a patient of his life. They argue that euthanasia is killing the patient without his or her consent. Such a definition of euthanasia is very limited. In a broader sense, such a definition applies only to the voluntary euthanasia. However, those who argue on the basis of voluntary euthanasia exclude what others refers as involuntaryeuthanasia, that is, reducing the shortness of palliative terminal cure for patients with no prospect of a meaningful recovery. From this argument, therefore, I will argue that euthanasia is always used in some difficult situations. On the first argument, life is supposed to be full of happiness and joy instead people suffering from diseases. For example, the prospect of ever suffering from diseases such as dementia can be enough reason to choose euthanasia, where the patient continues to suffer a life of unbearable pain with no sign of improvement. Instead of suffering, I suits to be more appropriate if the patient to choose euthanasia. Moreover, euthanasia is appropriate for patients who are terminally ill and cannot recover. For instance, patients who are suffering from dementia can be in a terminal condition or in incurable conditions. The use of dementia can be appropriate in such conditions because there can be no sign of the patient improvement of health. Another point is that patients’ rights should be respected and the power to make decision should be given to them. For example, patients have the right to given alternatives to dementia and time to evaluate them before making informed consent. Choosing euthanasia can also be a way of reducing burden and cost to the family members. On involuntary euthanasia, the family members can choose euthanasia especially when the patient spent years in a hospital in coma. In such a situation, euthanasia can help to reduce the medical costs of taking care of the patient who is in coma (Baker & Horder, 2013).

Some people think that it is often difficult for the patient to choose euthanasia; however, they may not prove if it is the person’s desire. There are many legal procedures that pertain to euthanasia and sometimes patients enter a legal agreement with the hospital administration to consider euthanasia in case they are in incurable and terminal conditions. Under legal agreement, however, patients’ health status and history must be strictly examined before being allowed to give the consent to euthanasia. In addition, the patient must sign the legal agreement to confirm that he or she has agreed to choose euthanasia (Smith, 2014).

There are those who argue that the doctor cannot provide a guarantee that adequate diagnosis has been done. However, choosing euthanasia is often the last resort of the medical treatment. As a result, doctors have full medical record of the patient that can guarantee that the doctor has done thorough diagnosis to prescribe euthanasia to the patient. In addition, hospitals are equipped with high technology facilities that ensure accurate data is recorded before choosing euthanasia (Paterson, 2012).

There are other arguments that have supported euthanasia such as it can help to reduces medical resources spent on the patient, reduces the financial burden to the family, patients under the terminal conditions are often willing to end their life and that even some consider that their organs can be taken for donations (Wilkinson & Savulescu, 2010).

Conclusion

Despite the pros and cons of euthanasia, it can be exercised directly and intentionally, without the patient’s consent, that is, involuntary euthanasia. Moreover, euthanasia has also been used on patients who provide the consent to the doctors before they proceed to terminate their lives. In both situations, it can be seen that euthanasia is applicable with or without the consent of the patient; as a result, this justifies the right to euthanize patients.

References

Baker, D.J., & Horder, J. (2013). The Sanctity of Life and the Criminal Law: The Legacy of

Glanville Williams. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press

Green, R.M., & Palpant, N.J. (2014). Suffering and Bioethics. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Paterson, C. (2012). Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia: A Natural Law Ethics Approach. New

York, NY: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd

Smith, W.J. (2014). Belgian Medical Group Gives Doctors Permission to Euthanize Patients

Without Consent. LifeNews.com. Retrieved from:http://www.lifenews.com/2014/04/10/belgian-medical-group-gives-doctors-permission-to-euthanize-patients-without-consent/

Wilkinson, D., & Savulescu, J. (2010). Organ Donation Euthanasia. Practical Ethics. Retrieved

from: http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2010/05/organ-donation-euthanasia/