Euthanasia is not an acceptable solution but a disturbing development
that undermines the very structure of positive palliative care. Instead of
supporting euthanasia we must direct our efforts at improving the
therapeutic method of alleviating the sufferings of the terminally ill
Euthanasia is the hastening of death or the deliberate ending of life
at the request of the patient. Over the last few years we have witnessed
heated debates about the medical, ethical, legal and moral aspects
euthanasia. At the very base of this issue is the fear factor', which
underlies both the sides of the argument. From the patients perspective it
is the fear of unbearable pain that cannot be assuaged, the embarrassment
of dependence that interminable illness causes, and the feeling of
worthlessness and loss of self-love. On the other hand we have a fear of
doctors and the possible abuse of the power. Let us have a brief overview
of euthanasia before we discuss the ethical and moral implications.
The word Euthanasia is actually a combination of two Greek words Eu
(easy, painless or happy) and thanatos' meaning death. So euthanasia in
essence means pain free and happy end to life. Euthanasia is the term for
the act of ending the suffering of the patient by putting him to death. In
other words it is physician-assisted suicide (PAS). [Michigan Technological
University]. There are basically two different forms of Euthanasia namely
Active or Passive Euthanasia and Voluntary or involuntary Euthanasia.
Passive Euthanasia refers to the case where there is no medical
intervention and the patient is left to himself to a gradual death. Typical
of this type of Euthanasia is the withdrawal of life support devices. On
the other hand active Euthanasia is a case where death is forced by
administration of some lethal dosage. (Sleeping pills or painkillers). It
is essential to appreciate the di...