Euthanasia: Right or Wrong?
"Bring out yer dead!" cried the cartmaster, ringing a bell as he walked through the streets. "Here's one," said a man, who walked up to the cart, carrying what appeared to be a dead body. "Nine pence," demanded the cartmaster. "I'm not dead," spoke the body. "What?" inquired the cartmaster. "Nothing," the man said, "here's your nine pence." He proceeded to try to put the body on the cart. "I'm not dead," the body said again. "'Ere," the cartmaster said, "he says he's not dead." Arguing with the cartmaster and the "dead" body, the man tried to convince the two he was dead. "Oh, I can't take him like that," the cartmaster protested. "It's against regulations." "I don't want to go on the cart!" the "dead" man proclaimed. "Oh, don't be such a baby," the man said, trying to convince him. Within a matter of seconds the cartmaster and the man devised a "solution" to their problem, and fixed things to where the "dead" man lived up to his name. In a morbid way, "Monty Python and the Holy Grail" depicts a form of euthanasia as a satire. In the medieval times, caring for the chronically ill and the seriously diseased was not only a hard task to take on, but also a time-taking burden, taken up by those who could tend to it. Th
ere were poor living conditions, making it almost impossible to improve any declined health states at all. In contrast, today's technology and advancement in the medical sciences has brought many cures and "solutions" to many problems that were thought to be incurable as little as a hundred years ago. Although the improvements of today's medical practices benefit many, it complicates certain matters that handle the decision of either prolonging a person's life, no matter what his or her conditions may be, or to end that life out of an act of compassion and mercy.11 Not to say that civilization would be better without out such developments, but does it not entail some conflict in choosing such choices as prolonging or ending a life of suffering? A universal sense of humanity expresses that as human beings, people should not cause or sustain suffering. If that rests as truth, is it humane to carry out a "life sentence" of misery and pain? "If one accepts the notion that euthanasia or assisted suicide is a good medical treatment, then it would not only be inappropriate, but discriminatory, to deny [euthanasia or assisted suicide] to a person solely because that person is too young or mentally incapacitated to request it." (internationaltaskforce) Neither of the two acts can be preformed without someone other than the "candidate" for them, or if these acts were preformed without others, it could then be considered as suicide. Yet, the person concerned with these two choices should not have to always be the one to make the final decision. It would not be fair to them to have them be forced to live the rest of their lives just on the fact that they could not decide for t
Some common words found in the essay are:
Holy Grail, , I-must's Euthanasia, assisted suicide, euthanasia assisted suicide, euthanasia assisted, dead body, nine pence, family friends, person able, i'm dead, suicide person, acts preformed, today's technology,
Approximate Word count = 1136
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
