The level of acceptance that euthanasia has in society
Introduction
The greatest challenge facing anyone at a certain moment of life is having lived well and confront and accept the arrival of the die, when it is normally people wait and want it to be at the same time and in a calm way and in a quiet way and Without any pain.
Daily people experience both life and death but not all in the same way, that is why in this essay the issue of euthanasia is highlighted and many will wonder what euthanasia is? Its Greek meaning means "good death" for rapid purposes refers to the actions carried out by other people, at the express and repeated request of a patient who suffers from physical or psychic suffering as a result of an incurable disease and that is lived as unacceptable, unworthy and as evil, to cause death in a quick, efficient and painful way. It is said that euthanasia is only applicable to people who are evicted at some point and that they do not make sense to life and that at the time they decide whether or not to apply euthanasia, of course that if the person itself same cannot say it because of the circumstances of his illness, a relative can give such authorization. The person indicated to take care of this situation is the doctor through methods that do not cause patient pain.
Treating the theme of euthanasia seems complete task. There are several areas involved such as law, religion, morals, culture, doctor’s work, or economic and family reasons. What does the person who are evicted feel? With what right do we dare to decide when to put an end to a life? Here is the great dilemma. The most important points will be mentioned in this essay with its variants, in order to form an opinion on this topic to determine what so much acceptance or if it is simply rejected.
Before continuing we should be clear about the difference between euthanasia and assisted suicide, these terms many times confuse them assimilating them or even saying that it is the same.
Assisted suicide is one in which a patient (terminal or not) asks for a medicine to his doctor to end his life, but in this case it is the same patient who performs the action of his suicide when ingesting the medication and ending To his life. On the other hand we have euthanasia and this practice as we have already said requires medical assistance and without physical sufferings.
Developing
The beginnings of the practice of euthanasia occurred in ancient Greece and Rome, only that with that name it was not known at that time, they usually used the hemlock that is a plant that becomes a powerful poison. This plant first causes other reactions in the body such as vertigo, digestive problems and body temperature decrease. After an hour all muscle strength is reduced and renal failure, seizures, respiratory problems ending in asphyxiation begin to have problems. Although of course this assisted death caused pain because it began to be used mainly for people convicted of death; although there were also cases in which they used it in people with diseases at that time or who were suffering in life. Since then, debates began that whether or not this technique should be used.
Today the same thing happens with this issue since it is quite delicate and contradictory, many support it and many reject it because well in the country there are different opinions or laws on euthanasia. Thus, in certain places such as the Netherlands, Belgium, Colombia and Luxembourg this practice is totally approved before the laws and these countries have as a clear concept that euthanasia is “the termination of life by a doctor at the request of a patient” (Wikipedia, 2019). In Belgium within the law that I accept the practice of euthanasia, it is established that the request must be by written and signed or by the patient or by an authorized relative, after delivered this request, at least one month must be expected and seek opinion From a second or third doctor specializing in this disease that if one of the doctors who review this case gives hope of life and fight for life.
Within euthanasia we can differentiate passive and active euthanasia; In passive the only thing that is done is to suspend the application of measures that keep the person alive, that is, those who only follow alive with the help of a machine that helps him breathe, this respiratory machine is disconnected and Automatically the person dies since as those people are commonly said they are already dead in life because they are not aware and have been depending on one machine for a certain time.
Now active euthanasia is one in which death is caused through actions that shorten life a clear example is a lethal injection.
Within this context, passive euthanasia is more accepted because in itself the only thing they do is stop life but active euthanasia is considered the most human, because it cuts with the suffering of a person.
This is not a recent issue, but has been going for many years and within this issue there are many cases that have drawn attention since in countries that have not yet legalized this practice there were people who fought against the law or even passing Above the law so that they can apply this practice and be able to die calmly.
This is an issue that as we have clearly seen involves three parts: science, public opinion and partly politics, since so that it is not considered an attack against humanity, it must be legally established, medically diagnosed and socially accepted.
But what do doctors think about this subject as professionals in the area? How positive is to apply euthanasia at the medical level? As we all know the vocation of people who become doctors is to help people and even help them have a second life opportunity, that is why euthanasia goes against their medical principles, however many believe that helping Having a pain without pain is also human and in these cases they follow their medical principles.
Before a survey 6 out of 10 doctors are in favor of the legalization of euthanasia, however, only the minor It would devalue the professionalism of these doctors and at this time it is when a contradiction between ethics and morals enters, since these two go hand in hand.
Ethics cares about the values that go from good to evil, of what is correct to the incorrect; According to ethics, this issue indirectly becomes a right to kill which is incorrect in the eyes of society because they see it as a homicide, now this ethically correct that benefits the affected person because it relieves pain and they are also free of choose what they want. From this point of view, euthanasia could be ethically correct because it goes against a person to continue their life without dignity, prolonging their life through machines or with pain and suffering.
On the other hand, although morals also care about good and evil, it is closer to existing beliefs (religion) and acceptance in society, in this case euthanasia is morally incorrect and unacceptable because normally before society and above all Before those who are religiously believers, he has the mentality that life must continue until God decides to put an end, because just as He gave us life is the only one who can take it away from us.
So far we have talked about what doctors, and society in general thinks about this issue; Now we have ever asked ourselves, what happens to people who suffer from a disease that occasions not to be able to use themselves or be in a plant state? These people in most cases enter depression, which makes them think that they don’t want to live anymore.
Well, in this way euthanasia brings positive and negative aspects for the patient, among the positive ones we find: euthanasia is the output for those who no longer have an output and for those who based on the medical description, they will no longer return. Euthanasia is not a practice that is done without foundations or bases, for this it is necessary to be a justification for because you want to practice and above all you should always privilege life, because if there are 1% hope that the person returns To be how the practice was canceled.
In the negative aspect we have that there may be cases in which family economic problems intervene, that is, inheritance problems, and for this reason the euthanasia is applied, the patient is no longer being helped, but rather the relatives to commit a justified crime. In addition, even if it is for avoiding pain and suffering to the patient, he would create a feeling of guilt in family members because they would lead to them indirectly collaborated to take his life from a beloved family.
Euthanasia reveals the deep contempt for the racial dignity of the human being, and it is established that a person does not lose dignity by suffering. At present it is contradictory to defend or want to legalize euthanasia when medicine in many cases offers alternative treatments that relieve pain and help the treatments of sick people.
Conclusions
It is for these reasons that before society this practice today is not yet totally accepted, although in certain cases the vision of this practice can change, since one can say superficially that he would never perform or ask that this practice be carried out, but only until we live it in our own flesh and influence all the factors (economic, dignified life, etc.) We can safely say that this practice is totally inhuman or quite the opposite and getting to think that it is humanly correct to make the decision to help die to a close relative through the practice of euthanasia, since there are many circumstances in which Euthanasia can justify and become acceptable and human. But without a doubt this is one of the most difficult decisions that can be presented to them in life, and I think we must be really prepared for any situation that can be presented to us.
Leave feedback