Euthanasia is the practice of ending one’s life in a painless manner. This has been a subject of great controversy across the world and it is only legal in certain places. At one end of the argument, advocates say that euthanasia, or physician assisted suicide, is a merciful method of death. Those who disagree consider this method as a form of murder.
The two types of euthanasia are voluntary and involuntary. Voluntary euthanasia is performed when the patient finds the pain unbearable and willingly asks for death, knowing that his/her situation has no hope of improving.
The right and wrong of this act depends on the magnitude of the illness. One who suffers from immense pain is not capable of making practical decisions. So, someone else who is familiar with the situation must evaluate the patient’s decisions. If the patient’s condition is incurable, then it is impractical to suffer for the sake of living. It would help the patient a great deal to be put to death painlessly. But if the patient has hope of recovering and the pain is only temporary, it would certainly be wrong to use this method, even though the patient begs for it.
Involuntary euthanasia is performed when the patient is incapable of making decisions (coma, paralysis, Alzheimer’s, etc.). These terminal diseases will most likely lead to a gruesome death. Once this has been confirmed is when a friend or family member will make the decision for the patient and remove their life-supporting equipments or give lethal injection. The dilemma is that this form of death is technically murder, which is crime, but the intent being to end the suffering.
I would say that this is moral and truly an act of mercy. Those who would argue with me would say that it is pitiless murder. The righteous deed, they would say, is to let the patient die by his/her own accord. Doing something beneficial for another is not a crime. Dying by one’s own accord means to edge closer to death painfully. By ending this...