Difference between revisions of "Euthanasia"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 3: Line 3:
 
Most [[libertarians]], many [[liberals]] and (particularly in [[Europe]]) some [[conservatives]] support legalization in some circumstances of ''voluntary euthanasia'', i.e. the termination of a dying patient's life upon his/her own explicit request. Voluntary euthanasia has been legalized in the [[Netherlands]], [[Belgium]], [[Switzerland]] and the US state of [[Oregon]].  Legalized euthanasia has limitations on when it may be used, such as the approval of a number of physicians when a terminally ill patient suffers from excruciating pain. Opponents of euthanasia maintain that this rarely constitutes an obstacle, as in practice all it requires is a few physicians to authorize it, and that legalization thus violates the [[sanctity of human life]]. They also fear legalization could be a slippery slope, leading to the planned and involuntary termination of all life that is deemed "unworthy", as in the [[Nazis]]' program to kill the mentally and physically handicapped. Supporters of legalized voluntary euthanasia, on the other hand, feel that a complete ban would unnecessarily prolong the suffering of some terminally ill patients and thus contravene the teachings of the [[Gospels]]. They believe that the rule of law in democratic societies prevents excesses such as the euthanasia program of Nazi Germany.  
 
Most [[libertarians]], many [[liberals]] and (particularly in [[Europe]]) some [[conservatives]] support legalization in some circumstances of ''voluntary euthanasia'', i.e. the termination of a dying patient's life upon his/her own explicit request. Voluntary euthanasia has been legalized in the [[Netherlands]], [[Belgium]], [[Switzerland]] and the US state of [[Oregon]].  Legalized euthanasia has limitations on when it may be used, such as the approval of a number of physicians when a terminally ill patient suffers from excruciating pain. Opponents of euthanasia maintain that this rarely constitutes an obstacle, as in practice all it requires is a few physicians to authorize it, and that legalization thus violates the [[sanctity of human life]]. They also fear legalization could be a slippery slope, leading to the planned and involuntary termination of all life that is deemed "unworthy", as in the [[Nazis]]' program to kill the mentally and physically handicapped. Supporters of legalized voluntary euthanasia, on the other hand, feel that a complete ban would unnecessarily prolong the suffering of some terminally ill patients and thus contravene the teachings of the [[Gospels]]. They believe that the rule of law in democratic societies prevents excesses such as the euthanasia program of Nazi Germany.  
  
The widely reported withdrawal of a feeding tube from the disabled and comatose [[Terri Schiavo]], with a court order prohibiting anyone from bringing her water, is an example of ''involuntary euthanasia''.  The [[Texas]] Futile Care Law, which allows a medical provider to override a family's wishes and withhold lifesaving care, is an example of the legalization, in precisely circumscribed circumstances, of involuntary euthanasia.<ref>http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/HS/content/htm/hs.002.00.000166.00.htm</ref>
+
The widely reported withdrawal of a feeding tube from the disabled and comatose [[Terri Schiavo]], with a court order prohibiting anyone from bringing her water, is an example of ''involuntary euthanasia''.  The [[Texas]] Futile Care Law, which allows a medical provider to override a family's wishes and withhold lifesaving care, is another example of the legalization, in precisely circumscribed circumstances, of involuntary euthanasia.<ref>http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/HS/content/htm/hs.002.00.000166.00.htm</ref>
 
[[category:law]]
 
[[category:law]]

Revision as of 20:43, June 30, 2007

Euthanasia is the deliberate termination of the life of a disabled or terminally ill person, for instance in order to end unbearable suffering. Under Anglo-American law involuntary euthanasia is illegal--although there are a few exception now in the United States (see below). Most religious leaders see all forms of euthanasia as murder.

Most libertarians, many liberals and (particularly in Europe) some conservatives support legalization in some circumstances of voluntary euthanasia, i.e. the termination of a dying patient's life upon his/her own explicit request. Voluntary euthanasia has been legalized in the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland and the US state of Oregon. Legalized euthanasia has limitations on when it may be used, such as the approval of a number of physicians when a terminally ill patient suffers from excruciating pain. Opponents of euthanasia maintain that this rarely constitutes an obstacle, as in practice all it requires is a few physicians to authorize it, and that legalization thus violates the sanctity of human life. They also fear legalization could be a slippery slope, leading to the planned and involuntary termination of all life that is deemed "unworthy", as in the Nazis' program to kill the mentally and physically handicapped. Supporters of legalized voluntary euthanasia, on the other hand, feel that a complete ban would unnecessarily prolong the suffering of some terminally ill patients and thus contravene the teachings of the Gospels. They believe that the rule of law in democratic societies prevents excesses such as the euthanasia program of Nazi Germany.

The widely reported withdrawal of a feeding tube from the disabled and comatose Terri Schiavo, with a court order prohibiting anyone from bringing her water, is an example of involuntary euthanasia. The Texas Futile Care Law, which allows a medical provider to override a family's wishes and withhold lifesaving care, is another example of the legalization, in precisely circumscribed circumstances, of involuntary euthanasia.[1]
  1. http://tlo2.tlc.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/HS/content/htm/hs.002.00.000166.00.htm