Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Professor Cuddy
English 102
27 March 2019
Neonatal Euthanasia
It is the choice of the parents that establishes the executive decisions for their child. A
child is harmless for most of their evolving states. While there are many important elements to
monitor as a child develops, health is most important. Neonatal Euthanasia is a desire of the
hopeless. The choice is not one which should be frequently implemented or even executed at all.
While it is a decision which is made in regards to health, it is a choice which also affects the
soul.
Euthanasia is defined as the act of intentionally ending the life of a terminally ill and
suffering person in a quick and painless manner for reasons of compassion and mercy. This
method was practiced by the ancients. The term means “good death,” and the practice was
enforced to allow the patient to die in peace and with dignity. For the physician, it would mean
caring for the patient and alleviating pain and suffering. However, the physician of ancient
times could also cause the death of the patient (Vizcarrondo, Felipe E.). The method goes
against the sustainable beliefs of many. Solely based from the morals of life, death is the
Death is not a thing which should be planned but a element of coincidence. The fate of a
helpless child should not be chosen, until the child is accessible to making decisions of their
own.
Neonatal Euthanasia is a method which should be banned. Although, to some it may
seem as though it is an element of good calling it possess the ability to be an act of immortality.
In a more ethical standpoint, this method is a practice of murder. The infant is not in a state to
voice their desire on the state of their health and how it will be handled accordingly. So from
the patient’s position this is involuntary murder. Murder is the act of intentionally taking the
life of one person (Anderson, Dave). Homicide should under no circumstance be normalized.
The practice is the exemplary action of unethicality. It devalues the lives of infants.
Accepting euthanasia means accepting that some lives are more worthless than others.
Legalizing euthanasia would send a clear message: it is better to be dead than sick or disabled.
For a healthy person, it is too easy to perceive life with a disability or an illness as a disaster,
full of suffering and frustration (Vivre dans la Dignité). The devaluing of lives serves as the
factoring unethical element of neonatal euthanasia. Accordingly, the right to die based from
this restrictions imply the duty to kill. Normalizing homicide under any instance is unprincipled.
This method coincides with the practice of abortion. Many people kill their babies before
they are born in regards to the fact that they do not want to take care of them or they feel that
they simply don’t possess the necessary qualities to do so. Neonatal Euthanasia possess some of
the same ethics. The method is solely based for parents who feel they cannot afford the
necessary elements to perform appropriate care for the child. Abortion, infanticide, and
euthanasia are all results of the loss of respect for human life. When people understand and
respect the sanctity of human life, they will not vote to end it (Truth For The World). From a
religious standpoint, these methods also go against the will of God on so many levels. Life
comes from God. It is God’s decision to give life and to take it away (Ecclesiastes 12:7; Job
1:21). In the Bible, shedding innocent blood is called murder (1 John 3:15; Genesis 9:6) (Truth
For The World). The concept of one who can shed the blood of the innocent is one is willing
There are alternative solutions to disregard this choice of method. Throughout society,
the well being of a household should be implemented. A whole house is a happy house, which
builds stronger families and individuals. Accordingly, in the United States people are offered
innumerable solutions to their problem versus the actuality and consequences. Neonatal
Euthanasia does not relieve the pain of anyone. It does not relieve; it aggravates. It pretends to
empty the chalice of suffering, but instead of emptying it,it fills it further (Kuss, Carl). It fills it
to the brim. as if one is really being considerate of the infant the pain of their absence would be
The most important element of understanding upon choosing Neonatal Euthanasia, is that
is a decision which cannot be undone. This choice is one that is permanent and cannot be
reversed. The child cannot be revived after the decision to be murdered has occurred. It is a
curious fact that most pro-euthanasia activists are opposed to capital punishment, primarily
because mistakes can be made when administering the death penalty. In other words, once a
person has been executed, not even the most conclusive proof of his innocence can bring him
back to life (Life Zone). The choice is one that is unethical and immoral.
The decision to perform a planned homicide on a helpless child is brutal and senseless.
The practice of Neonatal Euthanasia is one which should not be encouraged. As well as any
similar practices. The instances can simply be resolved with the well being of homes and
parenting. The essential lesson of life is to take what it provides and make the best life out of it.
Bibliography
2019, www.listland.com/top-10-reasons-euthanasia-should-be-illegal/.
vivredignite.org/en/.
truthfortheworld.org/abortion-and-euthanasia
www.scribd.com/document/166336784/Why-is-Euthanasia-Wrong.
“Is Euthanasia Wrong.” Truth TV: Ireland's #1 Source for Pro-Life Information,
www.prolifeinfo.ie/issues/euthanasia/is-euthanasia-wrong/.