Debate club Meeting 2011.5.21 Topic: Euthanasia
Pro: It’s important because the principle of choice is very important. It’s not “killing people” – it’s a choice to die peacefully versus a painful death. Some people suggest that “everyone has freedom to live and die as they want.”
Con: It devalues human life by taking it and admits that some lives are less important than others.
Con: Define “reduces suffering.” It’s not always painless, but there are numerous ways to end life: cessation of life support, etc.
Con: Think about the consequences of euthanasia for friends and family members.
Pro: It is decided by members of the family, not the doctor, so it’s their choice. Maybe they don’t want the patient or their families to suffer.
Con: Do they really want to die? It might be against the patient’s wishes.
Pro: There are two different types: patient decides/terminal illness; patient can’t talk and brain is dead. We should have more discussion about the 2nd case, but the 1st one should be allowed.
Con: Doctors can abandon responsibilities if they are allowed to kill people and families can abandon patients de to financial reasons.
Pro: If they’ve been ill for a long time, patients choose because of financial burden. I don’t know about doctor’s abuse: they have to get consent from the family or the patient.
Con: There can be cases where doctors secret abandon patients by saying “there is no way to save them” when the simply don’t have the ability or don’t want to try. Or it can be used by people who want to kill the patient. Euthanasia can be killing by other people’s will, not the paitnet will.
Pro: What is you position on exceptions? Are you opposed in all cases? When is the patient dead: biologically or socially?
Pro: Is being brain dead truly alive or not?
Pro: Not being able to do anything by yourself should count as not really alive.
Con: So if someone is sprayed in the eye so they can’t do anything for themselves, they should be killed?
Pro: I agree there can be some side effects, but it can be fine with some laws and government limitations. Think about it: friends and family will be sad with the death, but the patient has a right for self-determination to choose their own fate.
Con: It’s not suicide, even if the patient chooses. The doctor does the killing so it’s murder.
Pro: Murder is killing someone against their will. Consent is involved in euthanasia.
Con: What about the doctor’s mental stress about killing others.
Con: The Pro side said that everyone has a choice to live or die with suicide. But even suicide is a bad thing. Even if someone has the self-determination to die, euthanasia can make your weak instead of trying to overcome the disease. Patients won’t try, but instead just think about dying.
Pro: But I don’t think that every patient will think “I should have euthanasia and de. They will still try to fight. But if there’s no hope, they can go peacefully.
Pro: Suicide and euthanasia are different things. Killing yourself needs some behaviors conducted by oneself. Euthanasia is conducted by a doctor or medical professional.
Con: I think the concept is not that different.
Con: If consent is unavailable, “involuntary” euthanasia is a criminal offense: homicide.
Pro: Involuntary euthanasia/homicide someone who is in charge of them when they can’t decide can in fact induce that they would want to die.
Con: But this is life and death: it’s a serious problem.
Pro: Quality of life trumps life itself. If patients had that decision themselves, they would rather die.
Con: Protecting life for all trumps protecting the quality of life for some. It is important to support patients who are financial burden to their families, because then patients feel pressure to choose to die not because they are willing, but they are reluctant.
Pro: Does anyone think that brain dead patients have the will to live? They’re just breathing machines? I don’t think they have the will to live.
Con: We don’t know that they have the will to die.
Pro: If they are only kept alive by something created by machines or science, it’s not natural life.
Con: Ending that life would be the same as murder.
Pro: Before the quality of their lives drops to something like a machine we should let them go.
Con: but they are human.
Con: It’s cruel to kill someone who doesn’t have the will to live. It’s the same as suicide: no will to live. Suicide is also a serious issue.
Pro: It’s not the same. Suicide is a bad because they are not considering family or friends – they are denying the gift of life. Euthanasia is different because you get consent and try your best and there is no hope. You’re not denying the gift of life: it’s already been taken away.
Con: Different situation, but same concept.
Con: Legalizing euthanasia will create a slippery slope similar to WWI when the Nazi’s implemented euthanasia “mercy” deaths but it was really a way to kill patients.
Pro: That’s not euthanasia, that’s murder
Con: I’m saying that it can be distorted and abused in the wrong hands.
Pro: You’re using the same word, but it’s not the same as Nazis. It’s letting them go, not killing. The potential abuses can be controlled by laws.
Con: Euthanasia would discourage people from finding cures for diseases and discouraging people fromn having the will to live because it’s simpler to choose to die. It can be used as a way to maintain health care costs and the government can recommend it to people for financial reasons.
Con: Euthanasia can be abused. Brain dead patients’ families might hasten their deaths for financial reasons and when science might instead allow them a chance of life.
No comments:
Post a Comment