Sociology

Introduction
Mercy killing or murder, euthanasia is a controversial aspect of medicine that has lingered in the world since time immemorial. In ancient Greece and Roman communities, it was common for doctors to take part in physician assisted suicide as well as euthanasia. Debates concerning euthanasia can be dated back to the mid 19th century. Bills have been tabled in the parliament aimed at legalizing euthanasia, but have always been defeated (BC Decker para, 10). One of the strong hindrances against euthanasia is the Hippocratic Oath that requires physicians to vow never to give a prescription that would cause death of an individual if asked for it or make a suggestion to this effect.

However, doctors are faced by the dilemma of having to deal with the intense suffering of patients who are near death as they cannot put them out of misery. The big question that should be answered is whether patients should be allowed to suffer up to the time they die or be put out of their suffering before their time of natural death. This debate is of great importance to me after I witnessed the agony my grandfather went through after being diagnosed with cardiac melanoma that had metastasized until the day he died.

Euthanasia and Assisted suicide in Texas and the United States
As with many serious issues affecting humanity, there are those who are for euthanasia and those who are against it. One of the prominent people who are for it is Ludwig Minelli, the founder of the Swiss suicide facilitating organization Dignitas. Minelli believes that all those people who want to commit suicide should be informed of the best way through which they should die. He also stated that if a person chooses to die, others should help himher to die properly. Advocates for euthanasia argue that every person owns hisher body and therefore it is a basic right for a person to determine the time, the means, and the method of hisher death.

Another prominent advocate for euthanasia is an Australian physician, Phillip Nitschke, who tours the world training people on how to commit suicide. Nitschke states that if people have a right to life, they should also have a right to set out that life whenever they want. He argues that, all people need is to be properly informed of the matter (Kastenbaum para, 15). According to Bohlin (para, 14), health care workers as well as the public have a responsibility for making sure that it is legal for all terminally ill patients who are competent to consent be helped to die if this is their voluntary and logical request. It should be noted that no one would like to suffer from adverse effects of terminal illness in order to gain experience.

According to Texas Right to Life (para, 9), confusions surround the debate about euthanasia caused by misunderstanding of the various types of euthanasia that exist. These types include Voluntary active euthanasia which is the voluntary administration of medication and other interventions to cause death of a patient with the patients informed consent. The other form of euthanasia is the involuntary active euthanasia whereby a health care worker intentionally administers medications or other interventions to cause death of a patient when that patient was capable to consent but did not. In nonvoluntary active euthanasia, a health care worker administers medication or other intervention causing the death of a patient when that patient is incapable of consenting due to mental incapability or coma. Passive euthanasia is the case whereby health care workers either withdraw or withhold medical treatments that sustain the life of a person so as to let the patient die. In indirect euthanasia, narcotics or other medications that are used to relieve pain are administered in large doses that cause respiratory depression leading to the death of a patient. Lastly but not least is the physician assisted suicide whereby a health care worker provides medications as well as other interventions to a patient knowing very well that the patient can use them to commit suicide.

The history of euthanasia finds its roots in Greek culture. The term itself was used to mean good death. There were times when good death meant achieving death through compassionate care and at times it meant hastening the end of life of a person in order to relieve suffering. Mercy killing took place in battle fields when fatally wounded people urged others to put them out of misery.

Discussions aimed at reaching a particular conclusion, have become difficult since this term became associated with the mass murders committed by the German doctors on orders from the government. Mysteries and disputes about the legalization of euthanasia have been witnessed in the world especially after the legalization of it in Netherlands. A doctor in a case in 1973 obeyed her mothers voice to end her life led to the issue of euthanasia becoming salient. A ruling made by the Dutch Supreme Court regarding the case left many bewildered. The court stated that though euthanasia was illegal it was acceptable (Kastenbaum para, 14).

It is stated by many that euthanasia should be legalized in the United States. Reasons ranging from the very simple to complex are given in support of legalization of euthanasia. Based on the fact that people have a right to life, it has been argued that they also have a right to decide what to do with that life. According to Bohlin (para, 11), it is the basic right of a person to decide the time, the means and the place where heshe should die. It is very wrong to keep alive a terminally ill person who has made a decision to die. It is inhumane as well as unacceptable to make a person endure unbearable pain and suffering. The main objective of euthanasia is to help a person die painlessly. Patients should be given the right to decide the worth of their life. It is considered unethical by medical philosophy as well as law to support the life of a person mechanically against her wish. The patient should therefore be allowed to decide when to discontinue treatment as the fear of waiting for death in combination with unbearable suffering is traumatic to a patient. It should be a doctors priority to deal with the agony and distress of a patient even if the measures taken will affect the life expectancy of that person. Doctors should administer medications that are aimed at putting the patient free from extreme pain though these medications may lead to adverse effects. Euthanasia follows the same principle. Doctors administer medications that aid in death of a person peacefully thereby putting himher out of misery (Pedersen p, 53).

On the other hand, various reasons are given by those who oppose the practice of euthanasia. In that case, there are those who ague that legalization of euthanasia would lead to its misuse by family members who would hasten the death of a senior member in order to acquire inheritance. Though this can be the case, it is also likely to happen even when euthanasia illegalized. Family heirs can withdraw the life support systems thereby hastening the death of a patient which could be considered as passive involuntary euthanasia. Though the fight for legalization of euthanasia is not coming to an end any time soon, it is morally incorrect and as such it should be prohibited by law (Maisie para, 7). Everybody has right to life no matter the medical condition heshe is in. The life of a person should be respected and protected at all times. It would be ironical that technological advances are being made to improve the lifespan of a patient while on the other hand euthanasia is being advocated for. Family heirs on the other hand may be compelled by external forces to push for euthanasia so that they can acquire inheritance. It is very hard to determine whether the decision towards assisted suicide is personal or due to external compulsion. Although doctors can predict the time of birth of a person, they cannot predict the time of death. They also do not have the ability to predict the response of a patient to a particular treatment or even hisher recovery. Legalization and implementation of euthanasia would mean many deaths which would have been otherwise avoided if treatment was continued.

Conclusion
The issue of euthanasia has got a very rich history and its debate can be dated back to the 19th century. There are those who have been advocating for its legalization and those who oppose it. Euthanasia is a matter of controversy considering the fact that physicians are tied under the Hippocratic Oath not to administer or suggest any intervention that will lead to the death of a patients and that patient may be in a medical condition that no intervention can overhaul. Minnelli is one of the strong advocates of euthanasia. He states that if a person has a right to life, he should also have the right to decide to terminate that life especially at a time he is in great pain. However, even with such a strong conviction, the life of person should be protected and respected.