Euthanasia

Euthanasia originated from the Greek language meaning "good death." In recent use, the meaning on euthanasia is applied to an "action of inducing a gentle and easy death." There are different terms that are apart of euthanasia, including Passive, Active, Physician Assisted Suicide and Involuntary euthanasia, and depending on moral, ethical or religious terms, euthanasia can have many meanings. Passive euthanasia involves not doing something to prevent death, as when doctors refrain from using an artificial respirator to keep alive a terminally ill patient. Active euthanasia involves causing the death through a direct action, in response to the request of that person. Physician Assisted Suicide is when a physician supplies the means so that the person can easily terminate their own life. Involuntary euthanasia is used to describe the killing of a person who has not requested to die and is most often done to patients who are in a Persistent Vegetative State who is not mentally competent to make an informed request.

In Western countries euthanasia is illegal apart from countries such as Belgium, The Netherlands and Columbia. With French doctors and nurse seeking for the government to legalize euthanasia, I will explore both sides to the argument, those who think it is moral and those who think it is immoral, applying the theories of ethics to specific points. I will try to outline the different ways in which this controversial issue may be perceived and the actions of those opposing theories justified.

I can apply to the issue of legalizing of euthanasia to utilitarianism. This theory was defined by Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill and is summed up by the principle of Ð''the greatest happiness for the greatest number.' These theorists equated happiness with pleasure and absence of pain. Through utilitarianism, euthanasia is right when someone is going to be in a lot of pain for the rest of their life because the pain is intense and euthanasia would shorten the duration of the pain. The person who would be most affected would be the person suffering If they are not brought to death they will live in constant pain and suffering. Killing them would provide an escape form all their agony and therefore euthanasia would deem acceptable. The laws prohibiting euthanasia restrict people's right to control their own lives.

In killing a person suffering, no harm is caused to anyone else so the greater good for the greatest number is in use. As Voluntary Euthanasia Society New Zealand has established, Massey University Department of Marketing surveyed 1000 New Zealanders in September 2002, asking the question "Suppose a person has a painful incurable disease. Do you think that doctors should be allowed by law to end the patient's life if the patient requests it?" In response to this question 73% said yes, with 17% disagreeing and 10% unsure. Utilitarianism is consequential and the most important value is happiness, therefore, utilitarians would support euthanasia for the greater good.

The conflict of euthanasia has been an ongoing debate in several countries of this world. The debate has mostly been focused on whether it is morally right to perform euthanasia. Even though whether it is right or not is a heavy debate in itself, I would like to now focus on who has the right to decide on the performance of euthanasia. Is it the doctors, family, or the patient themselves? Personally I believe that the patient should always have the final say on what happens to them. If the patient is rendered completely unable to make the decision for themselves, then and only then should the family be able to make that decision for them.

There are two main types of euthanasia: passive and active. Passive euthanasia is basically the withholding of treatment to allow the patient to die. Active euthanasia is the administering of medication to assist the patient in dying. In Japan both have been practiced. In Japan, there are many different views on euthanasia in terms of who should or can decide. For euthanasia to be legally carried out in Japan there has to be a certainty of death even with medical assistance. The suffering of those close to the patient must be considered as well as