Medically assisted deaths that are requested by terminally ill patients is a kind of mercy killing or commonly called as euthanasia. For many cultures, this is ethically unacceptable. Spiritual and religious beliefs that are dominant in a certain society will certainly disallow the legalization of this action. In other parts of the world, however, this has been legalized. In the US, the states Vermont, Washington, and Oregon, have made this legal.
For many religious groups and humane societies, they strongly oppose this type of killing. They strongly believe that death is not in the hands of man. It is a natural cause or occurrence that cannot be administered by any human being. These assisted suicide states require that the terminally ill patient requests the act to be acted upon him or her.
However, before this is resorted to and before medical professionals approve, there has to be a request from the patient who must be very sure and is in his or her stable cognitive sense upon request. In addition, witnesses must be there which constitutes the doctor and a non relative. Moreover, the patient should have been diagnosed six months prior by two different doctors who both ruled that he or she has six months only to live.
If these requirements are met, the patient will be granted the request after he or she requests again after fifteen days. This issue has resurrected since the death decision of Brittany Murphy, a brain cancer patient, has become sensationalized by the media and social networking sites. Many individuals have commended her bravery while others thought it was an act of cowardice.
Maynard immediately transferred to Oregon when she learned that she has a terminal cancer. She knew euthanasia is legalized there. She decided to take this option last November. She was so young, not yet thirty, very pretty, and had a great career and family life. As an advocate of assisted suicide, she claimed she had the right to claim her own death in a legal manner.
It was believed that the case of Murphy has spurred lawmakers to create legislations that will legalize the matter. Murphy made her final decision in November of twenty fourteen. It was very controversial and many thought it was unethical for doctors to actually approve it.
She was wise enough to move to Oregon where physician assisted suicide has been legally approved. But still, it was a very controversial case. Different groups have varying opinions. Politicians and lawmakers, consequently, are caught in the middle.
Maynard has created a great impact, both negative and positive to the society. The bills passed on are yet to be approved and as always, there are two sides of the coin. Perspectives regarding the issue are divided and everyone has the right to express how they feel about the issue. Among the different realms affected, the political realm is most pressured.
Regulators and law bodies must be able to wisely weigh their final decision. It is very complicated to come up with amendments that assure a win win result. Negative and positive implications have been seen regarding this, depending on the culture, religious, and ethical views of individuals.
For many religious groups and humane societies, they strongly oppose this type of killing. They strongly believe that death is not in the hands of man. It is a natural cause or occurrence that cannot be administered by any human being. These assisted suicide states require that the terminally ill patient requests the act to be acted upon him or her.
However, before this is resorted to and before medical professionals approve, there has to be a request from the patient who must be very sure and is in his or her stable cognitive sense upon request. In addition, witnesses must be there which constitutes the doctor and a non relative. Moreover, the patient should have been diagnosed six months prior by two different doctors who both ruled that he or she has six months only to live.
If these requirements are met, the patient will be granted the request after he or she requests again after fifteen days. This issue has resurrected since the death decision of Brittany Murphy, a brain cancer patient, has become sensationalized by the media and social networking sites. Many individuals have commended her bravery while others thought it was an act of cowardice.
Maynard immediately transferred to Oregon when she learned that she has a terminal cancer. She knew euthanasia is legalized there. She decided to take this option last November. She was so young, not yet thirty, very pretty, and had a great career and family life. As an advocate of assisted suicide, she claimed she had the right to claim her own death in a legal manner.
It was believed that the case of Murphy has spurred lawmakers to create legislations that will legalize the matter. Murphy made her final decision in November of twenty fourteen. It was very controversial and many thought it was unethical for doctors to actually approve it.
She was wise enough to move to Oregon where physician assisted suicide has been legally approved. But still, it was a very controversial case. Different groups have varying opinions. Politicians and lawmakers, consequently, are caught in the middle.
Maynard has created a great impact, both negative and positive to the society. The bills passed on are yet to be approved and as always, there are two sides of the coin. Perspectives regarding the issue are divided and everyone has the right to express how they feel about the issue. Among the different realms affected, the political realm is most pressured.
Regulators and law bodies must be able to wisely weigh their final decision. It is very complicated to come up with amendments that assure a win win result. Negative and positive implications have been seen regarding this, depending on the culture, religious, and ethical views of individuals.
About the Author:
You can visit fenregistration.org for more helpful information about The Debate On Assisted Suicide States.
{ 0 commentaires... read them below or add one }
Enregistrer un commentaire