In a typical situation, a person has some terrible, deadly disease. He is trapped in a hospital bed, with all sorts of medical equipment connected to him, unable to move or do much of anything except exist. He is in terrible pain; he begs to have these machines disconnected so he can go home and live out whatever life he has left and die in peace. He does not want to endure the pain, but instead, to assuage it. However, the doctors refuse because to turn off the machines would surely result in his death, and they have a presumed bias against doing this. If a person decides that he wants to die, and someone does not think that this is a good decision, what right does the opposing person have to tell him that he cannot do this? .
In addition, one should have the right to end his life by euthanasia because of the unsolicited pain, suffering, and misery he feels due to the disease he has or the condition he is in. People in this position would most likely want to alleviate their pain, suffering, and depression "just to name a few "partially because of the inconveniences, emotional and physical burdens, and drawbacks imposed on family members, relatives, and friends. In considering suffering of terminal patients, one cannot exclude from thought the grief due to distress, fear, and agony. According to an article written by Humphry Wicket entitled "The Right To Die- he states no one must "underestimate the bearable level of pain in the periods between doses of medication or simply from being turned over in bed,"" There is still too little known about what is actually experienced by patients as they approach death so it is evident that the individual, and only the individual, has the right to choose when he wants to die. .
The final element worthy of discussion in legalizing euthanasia is an individual's frustration in living, in his opinion, a valueless life after becoming critically ill.
