A healthy lifestyle, doctors and medicines usually try to improve and prolong our lives. Where is the limit of artificial life extension? Probably the most urgent ethical and medical dilemma is whether a person has the right to die . On the one hand, there is the patient’s right to die with dignity and, on the other, there are fears of abuse of the system. Euthanasia is part of today’s discussions around the world.
Euthanasia, or merciful killing, means the deliberate killing of a patient who is terminally ill and / or in chronic pain. These days, “doctor-assisted suicide” has replaced the term “euthanasia,” as terminally ill patients increasingly express their assertions about euthanasia.
Although new technologies and modern medicines allow doctors to “heroically” prolong life, such as coma, unconsciousness, artificial respiration and blood circulation devices, artificial nutrition, hydration and medication, more people question whether this is right. At the same time, many ask why people with deadly diseases such as Huntington’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease or end-stage AIDS should suffer at all.
Euthanasia goes against the Hippocratic oath. The ethical problem of the doctor himself arises here, as the doctor has a moral and legal obligation to preserve life. Proponents of euthanasia argue that it would not be obligatory for a doctor to perform euthanasia. Only anyone who would like to do it would do it. Opponents of euthanasia point to several reasons for banning euthanasia:
Accurate diagnosis. Making an accurate diagnosis can be difficult because doctors make mistakes and many patients recover, although this is unlikely.
Influenced thinking. The thinking of patients who want euthanasia may be affected by depression, which causes suicidal thoughts. Depression needs to be treated and the patient gets the will to live.
Inadequate treatment of pain often causes patients to long for death. Many people criticize medical facilities for failing to provide adequate pain treatment. Critics argue that in these cases, when the pain subsides, patients want to continue living.
Pressure from relatives. One of the biggest problems is the risk that the “right to die” could become a “responsibility to die.” People can see the poor and vulnerable, especially the elderly, as a burden and put pressure on them to “fulfill their duty” to die.
Sippery slope argument. Once euthanasia is approved, euthanasia would not have to be just for the “terminally ill.”
Cost limitation . Euthanasia can be a way to reduce healthcare costs.
Euthanasia can become involuntary .
Euthanasia is the rejection of the meaning and value of human life.
Overall, opponents of euthanasia believe that euthanasia devalues human life and does not solve deeper problems in society. Proponents of euthanasia point to several reasons:
Unbearable pain .
Man has the right to a dignified death without suffering.
People should not be forced to stay alive. The right to life is not an obligation to live .
The right to euthanasia is in line with democratic principles.
Tolerance. If someone does not agree with euthanasia, they do not have to ask for it.
Economic arguments. Why common money should be used for the terminally ill who wish to die.
Denying an individual’s right to die is an arrogance that is mostly derived from religious teachings. Other people should have the right not to be forcibly imposed on them.
Slovak criminal law protects life even when a person is incapable of further life. Thus , accelerating death is a criminal offense , even if it occurs in the near future. The Constitution of the Slovak Republic also says this: “no one shall be deprived of his life”. So a doctor who helps a terminally ill patient by euthanasia is a murderer under our laws.
In practice, some form of passive euthanasia works when a patient refuses treatment. He has a legal right to do so. The patient is not taking medicines that would prolong his life. Many times he only takes medicines that alleviate his pain and thus let death run free.
” Neither by prayers can I be forced to administer a deadly drug, nor will I ever be prompted to do so myself. I will not give a woman a means of expelling a fetus. ”
Euthanasia is the deliberate termination of human life in order to reduce the enormous physical suffering of a patient. From a legal point of view, euthanasia is a criminal offense. Euthanasia is a serious criminal offense punishable by a term of imprisonment. The Church argues that euthanasia is an act of murder that must always be forbidden. It is morally unacceptable.
At the same time, not allowing euthanasia is undemocratic and violates the fundamental rights of the individual, unjustly discriminates against some people, and is contrary to popular opinion. In addition, it is economically disadvantageous and inhumane.
The debate over euthanasia is fundamental about the nature and meaning of human life. We as a company have to make a decision. We will become a more and more individualistic, self-centered society, or a society that respects and values God’s gift to us