should we legalise euthanasia

doing a debate on this at school and i need some international input on this one!

I'd certainly go for it, assuming you mean assisted suicide. Provided that the person is of functional mind, I see no reason to demand they continue living. Mandatory screening and counseling should be a requirement before any such action is taken however.

I believe that people have the right to end their own lives. If a person has decided that their own life is to end-- they have consented to die-- then it does not matter whether that death comes at their own hands, the hands of their best friend or their worst enemy, or the hands of their doctor.

Our lives belong to us, to be disposed of as we see fit. We should not require government permission to end them.

flowerpower said:

doing a debate on this at school and i need some international input on this one!

Click to expand...

Teachers are often floored by the right kind of debate. I would start with John Locke's life, liberty, and property. Your ultimate property is your physical body. The products of your labor, are products of what you did with your body and thus are your property. Put forth the assertion that one has a natural right to do with their body as they wish so long as they do not harm anyone else to a significant degree. For example, we allow everyone to eat too much if they so choose. We allow people to drink too much in most circumstances and allow them to smoke, even though we know it is bad for them. Emphasize free choice. I am sure CATrg might be able to give you some statistics to throw along with this. Say that one has ultiamte control over their body and thus they should have the freedom to destroy it. Also bring up the more emotionally strong points on how even with treatment some people live terribly painful lives. This may or may not help, but keeping poise is key (to most people at least). When most of us see someone debate they can make excellent points but if one question completely frazzles them then they have lost their sway. If you keep your poise you'll win the debate, so long as you sound convincing. Hopefully that helps.

I forgot to mention some blocs for arguments you will commonly hear against you. They might say that under your free choice logic people should be able to do dangerous drugs freely. Now if you're a libertarian talking to other libertarians, you can say that people should be able to do those dangerous drugs; however, in most cases saying that will not fly. Say that drugs differ significantly in that they can often cause direct harm to third parties and cost society in terms of welfare programs and leave kids with broken homes. In contrast, euthanasia has no third party costs other than perhaps the patient's family, which would usually be with the person before they committed euthanasia. If they bring up that this could be abused say there is a strong incentive against doing so. Doctors who force their patients into it could very well face the prospect of expensive lawsuits. There is every incentive for the doctor to make sure the person is in a sane state of mind to do this and that they absolutely want to do it. Once again I hope this can help.

I agree with Rathi and Korimyr.
I believe that the notion, pretty much unique to our culture, that anyone of sound mind wants to live as long as possible and that anyone who wishes to cease living is psychologicaly ill is a mistaken one.

I believe that our society wastes valuable resources both prosecuting and "treating" suicidal people for their suicidal tendencies, when treatment is not likely to work, since the person is not mentally ill to begin with, and prosecution is not likely to work as a deterrent, since the goal of the suicidal person is to cease living, and any punishment we mortals can inflict is confined to this lifetime only.

As the others said, I believe screening is necessary to separate those who truly are mentally disturbed and might improve with treatment from those who are of sound mind and have made a rational and well thought out decision to end their lives.

While I believe that any adult should have the right to end his or her life at any time, I particularly believe that physician-assisted suicide should be available as an option for the terminally ill.
There's nothing "crazy" about wanting one's life to end, when one is terminally ill and has lost all quality of life, and has no chance of regaining it. Needlessly prolonging agony does not seem sensible or justifiable under the circumstances. Quality of life is more important than quantity, and it is both sane and reasonable for patients enduring extended terminal illnesses such as cancer to wish to end their lives, when their lives have been reduced to nothing more than an endless round of pain and indignity, and when they are bankrupting their loved ones both financially and emotionally.

I understand that some religions prohibit ending one's life no matter what the circumstances, and that's fine. I completely support the right of those who believe suicide is a "sin" to live until their natural deaths, however long and painful their lives may be. If they wish to prolong their lives but cannot afford life-extending treatment, I have no problem with my tax dollars going to prolong their lives. Whatever it takes.
But I also believe that euthanasia should be an option.

I would probably worry about the future a lot less if I knew I would never be forced to endure the pain and indignity of an extended and incapacitating terminal illness. I wish to remain in control of all my faculties until the day I die, and legal euthanasia is the only way to ensure that you die before you lose your faculties.

1069 said:

I wish to remain in control of all my faculties until the day I die, and legal euthanasia is the only way to ensure that you die before you lose your faculties.

Click to expand...

Just remember that they can take away your drugs and your doctors, but as long as you have a knife and the use of one of your hands, you can still die at any point you choose.

It's easier with a doctor's help, or at the very least with a gun-- and I support wholeheartedly the legality of both-- but just because something is disallowed does not mean that it is impossible. People are very rarely actively prevented from committing suicide unless they're being held prisoner.