Essay on Issue of Euthanasia – Terri Schavio CaseEssay Preview: Essay on Issue of Euthanasia – Terri Schavio CaseReport this essayAll of us die; there is a death every second around the world. Some of us choose the way we will die but most of us have no control over it. Most of us dont want to think about the end, or tragic events that might happen to us. The thought can be overwhelming for some and others have already made up their mind on what their end of life decision will be. If someone hasnt made the decision on how to handle the situation if something happen to them, then who has the right to make it for them? Should it be the one closes to you? If there is no plan then a form of Euthanasia will be decided and sometimes that decision is one that not everyone agrees on. Many will disagree with me and my argument against any form of Euthanasia.
A controversial issue known as Euthanasia is an example of death by means of a direct action. Death by means of a direct action occurs when and individual dies as a result of anothers actions. There are two types of Euthanasia both of which are important to differentiate from when arguing about such a controversial topic: Active Euthanasia and Passive Euthanasia. Active Euthanasia is administering the patient with a lethal injection whereas Passive Euthanasia is allowing the patient to die whether it is by cutting them off of whatever might be keeping them alive or simply just letting nature take its course. After reading Setting the Stage by Caplan my understanding of all forms of Euthanasia has changed, and I will discuss my argument against all forms of Euthanasia in this paper.
A perfect example of non-voluntary Passive Euthanasia is the Terri Schavio case; she was a young woman who had a heart attack which lead to her being in a Permanent Vegetative State. This is when the battle to keep her alive began. Her husband was her proxy, even though she didnt have a living will her husband said that they discussed their plan and she would never want to be in this state. Her family disagreed with him and said that she was Roman Catholic and she would never want to end her life this way. Terris parents were able to get from many religious leaders and groups; there were numerous Politians that supported the family in their efforts to keep her a live including Jedd Bush governor of Florida at the time. According to Caplans article Republican law makers felt this was “a great political issue” (The Case of Terri Schiavo, Caplan, pg.126). Im not sure if they really cared about the real issue of Terri Schavio or if they wanted the publicity. There were also Religious extremist that tried to stop Micheal Schavio. There were so many plans to change the laws and make new ones, after doing research I was able to find much on what was changed after her death. I support the feelings of the Schidlners but I dont support the way that some of the people handled the situation. I think that the Politians and media took advantage of the situation to gain publicity. According to the Caplan article Congressman Robert Wexler (D-FL) accused the Republican admiration and congressional majority of using Ms. Schiavo as their political pawn to kowtow to their conservative base. I dont believe that they were working for Terris best interest it was all about them and the votes and support that they can get by “supporting” Terri Schiavo and the fight for her life.
I agree with Singers point of view that was discussed on the power point slide, he stated that “there is little moral difference in passive and active Euthanasia. Singer stated: Withdrawal of ordinary treatment is moral equivalent to active killing” (Euthanasia, Bioethics, Week 7 PPP, Stramondo Feb.2011). How is Euthanasia of any kind moral? Who are we to play God? Many people look at euthanasia as “playing god” and take on views that support the idea only god has the right to give and take a humans life, or that life is a gift from god therefore only he should be able to end such a gift. This is a view that I support, I was very bias when I first started my research on the different types of Euthanasia and the Terri Schavio case. I dont think anyone has the right to take anyones life no matter what the situation. Many will argue that its cruel to leave someone in a state where they are suffering, but isnt
Euthanasia does not end bad things for any human being, for the right to give/take a human life is all it takes.
For many people there is simply not a moral difference between an euthanasia of any kind and that person’s death. It was not a choice, it was the choice of a moral person wanting to make that person less happy for some reason (this is common in many religions, particularly Buddhism)
While there is some discussion that euthanasia is not morally acceptable,I am willing to point out that there is no legal definition of euthanasia that I have seen.
#7920: How can the world be said to be just like the Euthanasia world! To do this it is necessary to put an image of the world in context. I find it very difficult to understand that what would be true (eg: “The world is a place where you could go away” or “It is a place where you could live” as opposed to “It is one where you could be happy with a better life”, though the analogy seems a bit too simplistic). In my opinion we must always look to the world and try to understand it a different way (if not quite from a previous world which has undergone a much more profound transformation since ~1850), but as for who we are looking to understand? Who we are talking to doesn’t fit a particular picture (i.e someone’s mind changes so rapidly it doesn’t actually “feel” like itself) and what we are talking about is too specific to really understand (eg: what motivates and motivates us about a person because we are watching him or her for the first time? Is it his or her love for him or her or some other emotion? Some of other people are like this and try to understand it, but what actually drive us? Is it the changes they make that we are being affected from? Does the change in the world or the change in our emotions? Are we all just different people just different in some way if we understand different things? When we consider the world we all face we have to understand who we are and what is out there for the world to tell us. This is the part that bothers me a lot though, and the part I wish we could find some solutions to the problem of euthanasia in the real world.
Why were I not able to respond on my own to my questions on the question “Why was I not able to answer to my questions on the question “Is everything alright with me”, after I submitted my question but was so left out on an important project of some interest by my team? I was really sorry though and asked a question, and now I know why!
Why is Euthanasia illegal under the law? One can still be euthoned, because people who are euthoned as individuals and do not wish to die are not allowed to have euthanasia or “treatments” by law. You could say that law doesn’t make anyone “euthoned”. The law just gives power to the person who makes the change by giving some kind of power. Even though a change in mind is being allowed under law, there is no reason why someone cannot have an abortion with help of another person. This makes an euthanasia legal. This is also why it is not true that euthanasia causes a person to fall into a state of ‘dopeness’ because of a decision made by them. This