Surname 1

Name

Professor

Course

Date

Should Euthanasia be Legal?

Whether euthanasia should be legalized remains one of the most controversial debates

today. On one hand, some people believe that there is no need for a person to live miserable and

painful life yet they will die. These people are of the opinion that people in pain should be

allowed to authorize the medical professionals to end their life. On the other hand, other people

believe that individuals should be allowed to die a natural death without any interference. To

them, performing euthanasia is similar to murder and upsets the balance of nature through that

interference. Considering the debate, it would be better to help suffering patients to end life to

stop their suffering and anguish.

For some people, the end of life is not rosy because they are in pain. They have to keep

waiting for the day they will die to end their suffering and anguish. For such individuals, ending

life early, especially in the cases where they are suffering from incurable and terminal diseases

seems to be the most plausible step to take. According to Doyal, medical practitioners have the

responsibility of assisting such patients through euthanasia as long as they have the necessary

legal requirements and support of the family (1079). To make things easy, they should meet with

the family to discuss the way forward and weigh the options available. For the suffering patients,

trusted family members, for example spouse, sibling, or parent can make a decision on their

behalf because they are considered not fit to make such a verdict (Doyal 1079).
 Surname 2

Although it is morally right to help suffering patients to end life, some factors may

complicate the process. The medical professionals responsible for carrying out euthanasia have

individual morals, religious beliefs, and viewpoints about the procedure. In this case, they may

believe that it is right or wrong depending on these factors (Terkamo-Moisio, Kvist, and Pietilä

4271). In this case, it would be important to consider the medical professionals’ moral beliefs

when involving them in the process. It would be wrong to task a professional that believes

otherwise to stop life support machinery to conduct euthanasia on a patient. On the other hand, if

there were a practitioner that shares the same opinions, it would be right to involve them in the

process.

However, as Cockburn and Hamilton state, there is a need for clear legal frameworks to

ensure that euthanasia is done only when there is a need and the patient suffering has confided

that decision to a trusted relative. This became important when it was revealed that some

individuals may authorize euthanasia because they are beneficiaries in some way, for example,

the Nielsen and Justins case where the person that authorized the mercy-killing was a principal

beneficiary of the ailing individual (67).

In conclusion, euthanasia should be legalized because it would be a relief for the people

suffering from terminal diseases and are suffering in pain. Such people wish that every day they

live were their last but can do nothing. They can request their doctors to assist them die, as long

as that message is communicated through a trusted relative, spouse, sibling, or parent.

Considering that the practice is gaining a lot of support today, there is a need to have clear legal

guidelines to ensure that the people that relay that message are not out to authorize the practice

only for them to gain financially.

 Surname 3

Works Cited

Cockburn, Tina, and Barbra Hamilton. “Assisting a suicide: Potential succession law

consequences.” The Queensland Lawyer 33(2013): 67-74. Print.

Doyal, Len. Why active euthanasia and physician assisted suicide should be legalised. British

Medical Journal 323(2001): 1079-80. Print.

Terkamo-Moisio, Anja, Tarja Kvist, and Anna-Maija Pietilä. “Multifaceted Nature of

Euthanasia: Perceptions of Finnish Registered Nurses.” Journal of Hospice & Palliative

Nursing 17.2(2015): 105-112. Print.