Differences between Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide

Discus about the Practice of Euthanasia all over the World.

The practice of euthanasia is a leading global problem in the present world. This is sometimes termed as ‘assisted suicide’. This is the act of purposely helping any individual or encourages and motivates them to end up their life in order to overcome the stress and the burden they are going through and to overcome the embarrassment they face. This is a practice that is not legal and the practice of it is not encouraged

On the contrary it can be argued by Gamondi et al. (2014), that euthanasia differs from the concept of ‘assisted suicide’. This has become a global issue now. This is a highly sensitive issue and the laws and the policy related to this vary in different regions across the globe. According to Emanuel et al. (2016), the act of ‘assisted suicide’ is the act of instigating a person to commit suicide in order to release all the pains of the person. On the other hand Kouwenhoven et al. (2013), argues that euthanasia is the act where a person deliberately ends up the life of another person on the request of that person. This is done to make the person relief from all the pains and sufferings. It has been witnessed throughout the world and it is illegal in all the sections of the world. Efforts should be made to eradicate this practice for ever in all the parts of the world to achieve the common good of the people.

It has been reported in many parts of the world. The impact of these is different in different parts of the world:

In the northern territory in Australia this was first observed. This was reportedly the first place to legalize euthanasia under the Rights of the Terminally Act. A total of four people were euthanized before it was replaced by the Senate in Australia 1997 (Gamondi et al., 2014).

The act was made legalized in the year 2002 in this region. Some narrow guidelines were set for the doctors to follow regarding the practice of euthanasia. It was set in such a way that the students would have no hope for improvement and they would request themselves for euthanasia (Dan, Fonteyne, de Cléty, 2014).

The region made physical assisted legal but not euthanasia. The act requires that the Oregon Health Division is aware of these happenings in order to be published in an annual report. The report showed that there were some amount of people who were received prescription for the lethal medication that year (Gamondi et al., 2014).

Legalization of Euthanasia in Different Countries

In Belgium the act of euthanasia was made legalized. It was designed in such a way that two doctors would be involved in it and the method of death would be mutually decided by both the parties (May, 2017).

In Switzerland the act of assisted suicide is legal but the act of euthanasia is illegal. The organization named, EXIT who assists the patients to die and to fulfill their right to die has stated that the individuals must fulfill certain criteria like he or she must be over 18 years old, he or she must be a resident of Swiss, they must be mentally competent and must be suffering from mentally competent and most importantly they must be suffering from intolerable health problems (Pool, 2014).

According to the Catholic social teaching this process is not a justified one. The teachings of the Catholic strictly follows the Bible and in Bible it has been mentioned that every person must take good care of himself or herself as they are the gifts of God. Therefore every person must preserve oneself as they are valuable. The Catholic teaching opines for the fact that dying by practicing euthanasia is not an act of honor. Rather it is an act of disgrace. The Catholic teaching considers every human being as the blessing of God and it is a sin to end up life voluntarily. The person ending up his or her life in such manner will be never be forgiven for his sin. Suicide is an act of sin. The teaching is headed towards the attainment of the good of all living in the society.

There are few ways to address these challenges. The ways of rectifying the challenges should be followed in order to eradicate this evil practice from the society in order to save every individual from this illegal practice. The first and foremost way is to make the networking with supportive organizations and individuals (Vaughn, 2015). The Euthanasia would establish the Prevention Coalition that would establish the relationships with the organizations that adhere to the principles. This would seek and identify certain organizations that would support the prevention of this act and would invite them (Somerville, 2014).

The need for this should be recognized in the first hand. The research should include the target groups that practice this cat and the reasons for practicing this. The research should also include the public opinion polls, the identification and the sharing of the information with the supportive organizations, the recognition of the successful hospice and the service model (Steck et al., 2013).

Addressing the Challenges of Euthanasia Practice

There should be strict laws regarding the abolition of this practice. The laws and the policies should be practiced religiously. In many cases it has been observed that the laws are formulated but they are not practiced or even encouraged to practice. This should be taken into account and the progress of the same should be checked. Corruption is the main cause behind the practice of this. The doctors and the health sectors are found to offer bribes to the legal body or the legal coordinators. The corruption should be avoided on highest priority. This can be done by forming strict legal system (Thienpont et al., 2015).

There should be some sessions that should be conducted with the patients who want to commit the act of euthanasia. The patients should be motivated to live in the counseling sessions. They should be taught to live and they should be given a meaning of life. They should be taught that ending the life is never a right decision. The license of such doctors who are practicing such acts should be cancelled. This would bring an effective change. The support of the family should be of prior importance. The family members should support the patients. The family support would compel the patients to take back their decision of ending up their life in such a manner. The pain and the relief of the patients would decrease if they adequate amount of support from their family members (Vaughn, 2015).

Therefore from the above discussion this can be concluded that the act of euthanasia is illegal in any form. The act of killing others is illegal and it can be referred to as the illegal act. Hence, the doctors who are supposed to save the lives of others should not take the life of their patients. This is not an appropriate way of dealing the sufferings of the patients. The profession of the doctors is considered to be the noble profession of saving the lives of others. They should think about the god of the entire society. They are not supposed to consider their ethics first and then the other things. This would add up to the traumatic experience of being a doctor. Legalizing the practice of euthanasia would force the doctor to go against the common good of the society. Therefore it can be stated that the government should provide better palliative care where the suffering would end rather than the ending the lives of the patients. This would help in the attainment of the common good of the people living in the society.

References

Brody, B. A. (Ed.). (2013). Suicide and euthanasia: historical and contemporary themes (Vol. 35). Springer Science & Business Media.

Dan, B., Fonteyne, C., & de Cléty, S. C. (2014). Self-requested euthanasia for children in Belgium. The Lancet, 383(9918), 671-672.

Emanuel, E. J., Onwuteaka-Philipsen, B. D., Urwin, J. W., & Cohen, J. (2016). Attitudes and practices of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide in the United States, Canada, and Europe. Jama, 316(1), 79-90.

Gamondi, C., Borasio, G. D., Limoni, C., Preston, N., & Payne, S. (2014). Legalisation of assisted suicide: a safeguard to euthanasia?. The Lancet, 384(9938), 127.

Kouwenhoven, P. S., Raijmakers, N. J., van Delden, J. J., Rietjens, J. A., Schermer, M. H., van Thiel, G. J., … & Weyers, H. (2013). Opinions of health care professionals and the public after eight years of euthanasia legislation in the Netherlands: a mixed methods approach. Palliative medicine, 27(3), 273-280.

May, L. (Ed.). (2017). Applied ethics: A multicultural approach. Routledge.

Pool, R. (2014). Negotiating a good death: Euthanasia in the Netherlands. Routledge.

Somerville, M. (2014). Death talk: the case against euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide. McGill-Queen’s Press-MQUP.

Steck, N., Egger, M., Maessen, M., Reisch, T., & Zwahlen, M. (2013). Euthanasia and assisted suicide in selected European countries and US states: systematic literature review. Medical care, 51(10), 938-944.

Thienpont, L., Verhofstadt, M., Van Loon, T., Distelmans, W., Audenaert, K., & De Deyn, P. P. (2015). Euthanasia requests, procedures and outcomes for 100 Belgian patients suffering from psychiatric disorders: a retrospective, descriptive study. BMJ open, 5(7), e007454.

Vaughn, L. (2015). Doing ethics: Moral reasoning and contemporary issues. WW Norton & Company.