Imagine a world marked by constant pain. In this world you are comforted only by the few minutes of sleep you get in-between the waves of pain caused by your cancer. This world expands only to the edges of your bed. You cannot feed, bathe, move, or take care of yourself. You are totally dependent on the nurse that walks in once every hour to check that you are still breathing. To some this is a horrible nightmare; to others this is a reason for euthanasia. Euthanasia has been a growing topic of controversy. It has been marked by countless debates of its morality, legality and whether it is a fundamental human right or not. In examining the leading issues behind euthanasia all three of these topics are of utmost importance. Where they come together is in the question of whether euthanasia is a fight for a person's right to die or a fight for a person's right to kill.
The word euthanasia has acquired a complex meaning in modern America. There are several types of euthanasia that must be defined in order to avoid confusion. The two most commonly referred to types are active and passive. Passive euthanasia is the process of quickening the death of a person by withdrawing or withholding some form of life support or life sustaining technology. Fundamentally the idea behind passive euthanasia is letting nature take its course. This includes but is not limited to removing respirators, nourishment, or halting necessary medication. In contrast, active euthanasia involves causing the death of a person through a direct action in response to request from that person. This is also called mercy killing or physician assisted suicide. This is the process of a physician supplying information and or the means of committing suicide to a patient. This would include writing a prescription for a lethal dose of sleeping pills or providing the patient with a !.
recipe for a deadly combination of chemicals.