Euthanasia

No, it is not illegal. It used to be, and many believe that it still is. I found out last year that the law is no longer valid.

In Australia the laws for suicide and attempted suicide varied for each state. It is no longer illegal to commit suicide or attempt suicide, except for the Northern Territory where it is illegal to attempt suicide.

The suicide laws were abolished in NSW in 1900, in South Australia in 1935 under section 13A of the Criminal Consolidation Act, and in Victoria in 1958 under the Victorian Crimes Act. You can find these on the internet by googling the key words (crimes or criminal act in the appropriate state or country). It's important to put the word "act" to relate it to actual written laws.

Previously, when suicide was illegal there were implications on your estate once you died, but I'm not sure exactly what these implications were.

The laws were abolished in the UK under the suicide act of 1961.

It was abolished as a crime in the Irish Republic in 1993.

In France it was back in the 1700s (sorry, I found this one on wikipedia but I can't remember the exact date. The others I found the actual law under government websites)

Active euthanasia should not be legalized anywhere, however physician assisted suicide should be

Tis an already manufactured object

No because their already dead. The life support is keeping the body alive. If it wasn't for the life support they would be long gone. So it's best just to let nature take it's natural causes.

* Euthanasia is a crime in most States with the exception of Oregon and Washington, but Texas, Minnesota and a few other States are trying to accept Euthanasia into their States. It's not a crime to the person that is ill if that individual has a long-term painful illness where they will not get better and want to die with dignity. Often doctors keep patients alive due to the Hippocratic Oath, but more and more doctors are 'for' Euthanasia. Some people are against it because of their religious beliefs. One day in the not too distant future Euthanasia will be an individuals right to decide upon.

as an intentional taking of human life, it is a form of homicide if not murder. one is generally dealing with adults here, not proto-children as with abortion. similar arguments prevail. Most Christian denominations have strong stances against positive euthanasia. This does not extend to passive withdrawals, when as one nurse in a nursing home put it- when the batteries are running down- no attempt is made to recharge them or jump-start. These were called D.N.R. orders or Do Not revive, resucitate, etc. if someone is in the terminal stages of life, it makes sense to let nature take its course. Do not confuse with deliberate, active euthanasia as in the case of the Kevorkian cases.

Short answer; Life-support.

Long Answer; Jehovah's Witnesses follow the teachings of Jesus as he was taught by his father Jehovah. Though Jehovah's Witnesses are imperfect like all of mankind, they sincerely desire to do as Jehovah requires of them.

Jehovah requires that his people show respect for life and blood, in all situations that they may face in their lives. At times life will force them to perceiver under difficult circumstances. Life is very much sacred to Jehovah. This is key to Jehovah's Witnesses' beliefs since Jehovah is the source of life. (Psalm 36:9) When one considers the life of an unborn child, it is precious to Jehovah. (Exodus 21:22, 23) Also, blood represents life. Thus blood also is sacred in Jehovah's eyes, thus to Jehovah's Witnesses. (Leviticus 17:14)

The answer should come as no surprise to us that Jehovah's Witnesses view life and blood as he does. A sacred gift.

Jehovah's Witnesses do desire to sustain life as long as possible, again since it is a gift form Jehovah, and love this gift dearly.

Although Jehovah's Witnesses love life, they will not try to save their present life by breaking God's law and thus jeopardize their prospect of everlasting life. (Matthew 16:25) With that view, they use all means available to save their lives.

However when life, as it unavoidably does, age beyond the point that it is maintainable, or when a sickness or and unintentional injury causes ones body to stop functioning so as to sustain life. Then it is a personal decision by the person and the loved ones of the person under this difficult circumstance to choose whether to sustain life through artificial means. It is neither unloving nor a sin to let this loved one fall asleep in death.

http://www.watchtower.org/e/20050201/article_02.htm

Once the injection has been administered, the effects are fast acting. It can take as few as 5 minutes depending on how much is injected.

The death of a person that is gravely ill.

I would point out the need for it. In the case of terminal patients who are in pain and have a negative prognosis, there are humane matters that should come into play. These include pain alleviation, a remedy for despair for both the patient and loved ones, and a reduction in the huge cost of keeping a critically terminal patient alive. Most of all, however, I'd add in human dignity.

Next, I'd define my terms. Make sure you differentiate between humane euthanasia, cynical financial remedies, and destruction of people deemed to be "substandard" -- all of these are frequent misconceptions when this subject comes up.

According to a 2009 report by the Assisted Living Federation of America, there are more than 36,000 assisted living facilities all over the United States serving more than 1 million senior citizens.

Euthanasia exists because there is people that have incurable diseases and cannot live their life suffering that way so they choose to die by the hand of doctors

Some of the side effects included, headaches, paralysis of lower body that may lead to nerosis and death, mania, diarrhea. It was banned for use in 1970.

It is a personal choice depending on so many details. There is no single answer.

It is a personal choice depending on so many details. There is no single answer.

It is a personal choice depending on so many details. There is no single answer.

It is a personal choice depending on so many details. There is no single answer.

No, euthanasia is illegal in Greece.

take warm water and pour it on a cloth on rub it on dogs head

Nowhere in the US is full-fledged euthanasia legal. Assisted suicide, however is legal in three states, and a fourth is considering it: * Oregon, state legislature, late 1990s * Washington, initiative, 2008 * Montana, court decision, 2008/2009 * Bill currently in New Hampshire legislature While euthanasia is not currently a big debate in the US, assisted suicide is hotly debated. Many believe that we should give people the choice to kill, whether it be potential life in an abortion or suicide for terminally ill, but some believe those under "severe psychological pain" (could be interpreted as chronic depression) should be able to kill themselves. The other side holds that we must not play the role of the Grim Reaper, we must let nature take its course, making the passing of our loved ones comfortable through hospice and morphine. Giving greedy relatives and financially-pressed health care providers could cause some to turn to this for profit. When you dance with Grim Reaper, someone loses. When speaking of euthanasia it is important to note the different uses of that term. Involuntary euthanasia is the taking of life without the informed consent of the patient. That is not legal in the United States. Voluntary euthanasia refers to the action taken by the patient and physician who both agree to end the patient's life. Voluntary euthanasia is often used interchangeably with assisted suicide. While Americans are split on the moral aspect of this issue polls show that a majority of Americans still believe that a doctor should be able to assist a terminally ill patient to end their life if the patient requests help. Republicans are reportedly more likely than democrats to object to patient directed right-to-die issues. In Montana, a decision by District Court judge Dorothy McCarter in December, 2008 ruled that the Montana constitutional rights of individual privacy and human dignity encompass the right of a terminally ill patient to die with dignity. It also said that patients had the right to physician-prescribed medications to hasten death and their physicians could not be prosecuted for providing assistance. That ruling has been appealed by the state's attorney general, Michael McGrath, on the grounds that the state legislature should decide on the issue and not the court. Unless the Montana Supreme Court overturns the lower court ruling, the ruling will be the law. In an interesting development, Michael McGrath has recently been sworn in as the chief justice of the Montana Supreme Court. He will recuse himself if the court takes the appeal. Also, State Representative Richard Barrett has filed legislation that would put McCarter's ruling into law with a bill to officially allow assisted suicide. In November of 2008 the state of Washington voted to allow assisted suicide in accordance with the Oregon model which was passed in 1994. The law takes effect March 4, 2009.

Death. Euthanasia is the act of putting an animal or person to death for humane, punishment or population control purposes.

Do not self medicate. It takes a Pharmacist and Doctor years to train and learn about save use of medication. Only a fool takes prescription medicines without medical guidance. Also indiscriminate use of drugs, particularly antibiotics causes them to become infective for EVERYONE as organisms learn/evolve to resist them.

For animal welfare and euthanasia see the related link below for information.

In the center of the Earth gravity is equal at every side causing you to be "weightless".

Diane Pretty was for voluntary euthanasia.

We know this because she was diagnosed

with Motor Neurone Disease, (MND) and wished to commit suicide. However she became too disabled and therefore wanted her husband to end her life instead.

The request to have one's life terminated by a physician as a mercy killing has been endorsed in some countries (Belgium and The Netherlands). In the scientific literature, euthansia has been associated with the terminally ill and depression. Some credible studies (because one must not believe all studies and must critically appraise them along evidence based medicine guidelines) have been conducted. This is a hotly debated topic. The main issue being that it is suicide stemming from depression. Those who deny the prescence of depression assess depression by questionnaires that are in the third person (ie either observed behaviors or by direct inquiry: How do you feel? Do you think life is worth living...etc). Qualitative, first person, experiential assessment is very difficult and has not yet been done or published. The reason being the difficulty in analysis and reporting. A qualitative assessment is highly individualized and subjective: two enemies of quantitative research. So mental illness/unrest maybe a reason for euthanasia. Doctors take an oath to do no harm, and killing another (besides in self defense) lies in the domain of harm. Individuals who are suffering and wish to die (remember the "English Patient") may require a loving supportive network more than dying. Although this maybe difficult at times, this very difficulty is more of a reason for us to support them till the very end: the natural end.

No. It is considered illegal.

In both human and animal euthanasia, the positive aspects are a painless death that, in many cases, brings an end to severe chronic pain and suffering. The person dying can sometimes say goodbye, and family/friends for both humans and animals can say goodbye as well. Particularly in animal euthanasia, the animal can be put down in a comfortable environment such as home or a favorite blanket to help comfort the animal during the process.