Is euthanasia good or bad or both?

Answer 1

Euthanasia is not necessarily bad. It mainly depends on the situation at hand. If a person wants to have euthanasia done to them on their deathbed than so be it but if it is done without the permission of the patient or close family members THEN euthanasia can be considered bad. Some call euthanasia assisted suicide but usually people who commit suicide do not have life threatening problems like euthanasia patients.

Euthanasia can be perceived as a humanitarian act or as an abomination against the dictates of God. For a person who is subjected to excruciating pain or hellish torment/suffering a humane escape/death is a heavenly alternative. It would be sadistic and repugnant for self righteous individuals to suggest to a person in that state of absolute helplessness and torment that a compassionate and just deity (GOD) would be so demonic as to oppressively condemn an innocent person to that hellish existence. Some people are confronted with the reality of life in a physical hell as against the belief in an irrational theological consternation and they prefer that the laws of the land not be governed by oppressive religious dogmas. People believe that it is a person's civil right to choose life or euthanasia and no individual or group with their sanctimonious bigotry should be allowed to transgress upon that inalienable right.

Putting a label of good or bad on euthanasia (reducing it to a binary solution) is unrealistic. It is simply a part of a continuum of options available to patients and doctors. In many cases the options taken to reduce pain decrease the length of the patients life while increasing the quality of life and so contain elements of euthanasia, refusing chemo for cancer patients or blood transfusions on the base of culture or religion is also seen by some as a type of euthanasia. In any argument of euthanasia (because it is an emotionally loaded topic) the concept of genocide, eugenics (weeding out the inferior races, types or individuals) is mixed in.

The problem here is the use of the term 'euthanasia' which is not the same as 'assisted suicide'. Assisted suicideis a decision made by an individual to end their own life with the assistance, or blessing, of their loved ones. In the UK, assisted suicide is illegal and rightly so. Many people believe that allowing assisted suicide (as they do in Switzerland), will place a great deal of pressure on the elderly or infirm "not to be a burden" on their loved ones (how many times have we heard that expression!). As a result, many people are feeling coerced into assisted suicide (as many have testified in Switzerland). Therefore what might become, in law, a right to take ones own life in this way, can very, very easily become a duty to take ones own life, and then it an easy step in law to make it become compulsory to help an already pressed national health service (Remember the movie Logan's Run? Science Fiction but quite plausible). Thanks to excellent palliative care nowadays, and the remarkable work of hospices, terminal illness is now not always equated with pain and suffering. Most Christians in the UK believe that life is a God given gift and should therefore be treated with reverence and is not our own to take.

As for euthanasia, this is the 'putting to sleep' or the withdrawal of medical care to a dying patient by someone else, much in the same way an animal is put down by a vet. This is always wrong, as it removes the decision from the patient, and places the unenviable decision onto the Doctor Who then has to 'play God'. This is grossly unfair on both parties.

There is a third strand too... the 'Do Not Resuscitate'rule. This is quite different. If a terminal patient's heart stops, and a previous contract of DNR then there is a legitimate reason for not resuscitating. Nature (or, if you are a Christian, 'God') has taken its course naturally and therefore the decision over that person's life has been taken by nature/God and not by an individual.

Therefore, this whole area is a spiritual, psychological and ethical minefield. Too many have made up their minds about euthanasia/assisted suicide/DNR without really looking deeply into the facts and ramifications of decisions taken without being fully informed. When it ultimately effects them or their loved ones, too many times bad decisions have been made that affect the lives of those left behind for generations to come. No glib answers to this matter should ever be given as it is a subject that requires a great deal of thought, guidance (and for the Christian, prayer) to arrive at a suitable decision.

Euthanasia is bad. Who is to decide who will die or not. God is the only person that has the right to take away or give life not a doctor. If some one is terminally ill and in pain then doctors help with the pain, when the time is right God will decide when the person's life comes to an end. If everyone decided to give in and die then where would the world be now in terms of medicine? Euthanasia is the easy way out and no one has the right to take their own life or others but God.

There are several ways you can look at this question. Naturally the first way to look at it is from your own point of view you may feel that if life is not worthwhile to you any more as a result of let us say pain that is being suffered as a part of a terminal illness it makes sense that you should be able to say no more this is not worth putting up with any more so you get your medic or friend to help you shuffle the mortal coil so to speak. The problem with this sort of thinking however is that it is human nature to try to perfect and expand on everything. The first thing that will happen is that there will be specialists that will take care of this problem as most doctors would rather not have anything to do with this side of the patients treatment, After this it will be only a matter of time before euthanasia is allowed as a result of the patient having some time in the past alluded to their agreement to being euthanized after they had lost the ability to give express permission to have this done. With an aging population more and more people are going to prove to be a drain on the treasuries coffers, so chances are that the government is going to be behind this as it will save them a lot of money. The next line of thinking will be that at a certain time the decision to terminate will be made by a board with the aid of the patent's doctor or doctors. This can put the power of life and death in the hands of a few medics. And you may end up in situations where people are dispatched as the result of corrupt deals between beneficiaries and authorised doctors, like some of the deals that were made in the past by mental health professionals where by a person could disappear into a mental asylum while the family took over control of their assets. I know people are helped on their way and it is done quietly and because those involved feel there is no other way out and I don't particularly hold it against them. However while I agree with euthanasia I disagree with it being legalised and institutionalised. There are many more ways that this question may be looked at philosophically, ethically and in the context of religion, however without writing a book about it I would have to say in the end that I both agree and disagree with euthanasia. Like capital punishment the overall impression I have is that while it can be tempting to kill some one for the best of reasons, when it boils right down to it is always wrong.