Euthanasia or Murder?
Euthanasia is a complicated issue and not easy to debate about, so going through euthanasia pros and cons is necessary. I try to think about both points of view and try to be as objective as possible. It is very difficult to understand the killing of someone who is unable to tell you their wishes. For that reason I will be arguing that euthanasia in my opinion is wrong.
Euthanasia is defined as the Act or method of causing death painlessly so as to end suffering. In better detail euthanasia is the killing of a person without their consent in order to end their suffering. In most cases the person cannot communicate their wishes with a doctor or member of their family. Euthanasia is often used when someone has been unable to make their own decisions in everyday life. For example their guardian decides when they get to eat, when to change clothing etc. for an extended period of time. In this state someone has been in charge of their well-being and they believe they know what is best for the person that they think is suffering.
I see euthanasia as being a very touchy subject, making it very hard to argue. Making the decision to euthanize someone could not be an easy one. I understand that the person making the decision for the sick believes that this is the best option for them but I still believe without the consent of the sick person that this is still murder. Today it is recognized that a person has the right to take their own life but it is not legal for someone to take another's life, which is simply called murder. Every person should be responsible for his/her own live. Everyone should have all the freedom in deciding whether a suicide is the best option in that moment or not. I am fully aware that is all a matter of situation for example in the Robert Latimer case he had a daughter who had severe cerebral palsy. She was unable to do anything for herself and was in pain every day. He took it upon himself and to end her suffering. When you look at it plain and simple like that you may see him as a hero but if you add more detail about his daughter Tracy and her life it is a totally different story. Tracy had joys in her life beyond her pain. She enjoyed seeing her family the sight of them made her smile. She had friends and many people that adored her, she had a life. For Tracy her life wasn't solely based on pain like her parents made it seem. I look at this certain situation with understanding eyes. My nephew, eye-opening, has many of the same symptoms as Tracy. He too is unable to walk, talk, he eats through a feeding tube every day, he also recently just had to go in for hip surgery for the exact same reason. I absolutely sympathize with their situation but I don't believe there was a day me or anyone else in my family thought Levi would be better off if he was not alive anymore. Instead of looking at the most harsh gruesome option we look forward to the positive. We look forward to having every day Levi lives being the best. Every day is a new milestone for him an opportunity to make his life better. We work with him every day to make him comfortable and happy. Giving him the things he enjoys in life and living him, we get through each day. Some may argue that keeping him alive is a selfish thing to do while he is suffering. But one question we must ask ourselves is that, is their life so based on their disability that it makes the rest of their life so insignificant enough that we can simply end it? My nephew smiles, cries, laughs, just like any other kid his age. Euthanizing him simply because he has struggles is a terrible selfish thought my mind. Just because the caretaker finds it hard to deal with the person on a day-to-day basis doesn't mean that the person going through all of it doesn't want to continue on living. Because this person cannot talk, one must completely remove their own feelings from the equation and think