A Glimpse at Mercy

De Laura Foreman
A Glimpse at Mercy

My friend, Josh, states that euthanasia is murder. My friend is clearly wrong. Euthanasia is useful in today's society. It is useful for its passive background, the checks and balances, and its medical achievements.

Josh believes euthanasia is not an option for people. First of all, people believe they should die naturally. Many homes hold strong religious values and believe God will take care of when the end is supposed to come. Another point he makes is people in society would abuse their right to kill themselves. Laws cannot stop everyone from abusing legal euthanasia. It is a risk that cannot be taken for the victim's behalf. A third argument is medical science has the ability to save lives. Corrective surgeries and pain relievers are already common in daily life and bring enough mercy to the terminally ill.

On the other hand, passive euthanasia is worse than active euthanasia. Although the Catholic Church has always been against euthanasia, it has been practiced for centuries by it. Josh’s religious values do not include the public’s non-religious values. An individual's belief in God does not concern the government; people should not be left to sit and die painfully as others watch. Every doctor has made a decision if a person will live or not; they will stop administering strong treatment and wait for natural death. Active euthanasia would avoid these hard times of waiting for a loved one to pass on. The golden rule supports active euthanasia; we would want others to put us out of our misery if we were in a terminal and painful situation. No one should be condemned to unbearable pain before death.

Furthermore, steps would be taken to avoid as many loopholes in euthanasia as possible. No law is perfect or flawless. The allowance of euthanasia would benefit society as an overwhelming majority. The few victims are one of the terrible prices we have always had to pay. My friend is missing the overall picture. Law would treat any misuse of euthanasia as first-degree murder. Head doctors in hospitals would require licenses. Many checks and balances would be inserted to insure the doctor's approval and avoid miscommunication. Mistakes would be easy to avoid for a medical doctor just based on the patient's condition.

Moreover, unlike what Josh states, medical science will never cure every terminal illness. Some pain is extreme and beyond the reach of pain-killing drugs. Even though medical science continues to improve, some patients cannot wait for the research to become a reality. The option of euthanasia would not be considered until all other possibilities are exhausted. Euthanasia is already used for beloved pets and animals who suffer needlessly. Medical science has brought enough to society to safely state when someone can be saved and when she cannot. It has also brought the ability to end a terminally illness comfortably. These advances bring relief to the patient, the patient's family, and the hospital staff that could not do anything more for its patient.

Euthanasia is a smart option based on its passive background, its checks and balances, and its medical achievements. This merciful act would improve the overall culture of society. Although Josh has best intentions in mind, he is clearly missing the bigger picture.