The Ethics of Killing in the Art and Science of Healing: Euthanasia

Imagine caring for a person suffering from a disease in which there is not a  possibility of   recovery. Think of living a life waiting everyday  for that morbid moment  to come . Fathom the thought when finances, time, and efforts have all but run out. Reaching a point in which every inch of hope has been lost .  Will you help that person, if given a chance end his suffering? But not in the sense of murder, but in the good sense of aiding and caring. Allowing  that person to finally rest and the family to move along with their lives. Will you be that Angel of Death? But the question is, if you will be that angel, will you break the mores and morals  to spare a life from a long time of suffering. Does your principle dictate that it is murder and could never be justified and that no death is good?Or that the end justifies the means, that a good death is better than living in the burden of pain and suffering.  Before opinions would be hurdled against this delicate matter, let us first examine the facts in a  logical and educated manner. 

What is euthanasia? As posted on the BBC website (http://www.bbc.co.uk) it is the termination of a very sick person's life in order to relieve them of their suffering. Euthanasia stems from "euthanos", Greek for "good death". It is usually carried out at the person's request but there are times when they may be too ill and the decision is made by relative or, in some instances, the courts.   It  has been at the center of very heated debates for many years and is surrounded by religious, ethical and practical considerations. 

Pro-euthanasia arguments have stated that  it is part of the  civil rights of the person to have the right to control his/her body and the right  to determine at what time, in what way and by whose hand he or she will die. Behind this lies the idea that human beings should be as free as possible - and that unnecessary restraints on human rights are a bad thing. Death according to these arguments is the opposite of life but the dying process is and it could be either good or bad. People also have the right to try and make the events in their lives as good as possible, thus they have the right to try to make their dying as good as possible  The philosophy that "rules are for the happiness of mankind", believes that euthanasia will make people more dignified and happier from choosing their death. 

Supporters of the anti-euthanasia stand, clearly state that euthanasia, no matter how the sugar coating, is still killing and thus against the very mores and laws of our civilized society. Religious groups would always give the two millennium old answer that life is sacred and no one but God has the right to take it, not even the person who owns it. Secular arguments pointed out that euthanasia is bad because of the sanctity of human life. All human beings are to be valued, irrespective of age, sex, race, religion, social status or their potential for achievement. Practical argument  insist that euthanasia is unnecessary due to palliative care and it would have a negative effect on the care of the terminally ill, if approved or legalized.

Let us now ponder with  our thoughts. Euthanasia is in fact killing and no religion, society or state presently in this earth condones such action. The thought of killing a dying person abhors most societies. Yet in this modern world people have been questioning those mores. Modern and postmodern philosophies have argued for the happiness of mankind and quick end to suffering and thus the admiration of suffering is no longer a fad.

So where do I stand on this matter? I am split with regards to this. Yes, I always believe that it is killing and  justification of it goes against our very norms and that God alone has the power to take that life. It is barbaric to kill. Yet, when the person do demand it or when you see that suffering has already been enough,  isn't it caring still? Is  dying a sign of surrender from the fight? Of course not, it is mainly easing the pain and the suffering. The end justifies the means as they say. It is better to do evil for a greater good. 

But that is me.  Now the bottle points to you. Where do your principles stand? Would you kill a life in order to save it? Or would you allow the person to live in pain in order to save him? 

Sources:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/euthanasia
http://www.euthanasia.com/