Euthanasia: To Do Or Not To Do.

Favour

• Euthanasia refers to the practice of ending a life in a manner which relieves pain and suffering. According to the House of Lords Select Committee on Medical Ethics, the precise definition of euthanasia is "a deliberate intervention undertaken with the express intention of ending a life, to relieve intractable suffering. "In terminally ill patients and in cancer patients who r undergoing tremendous pain.it should be done, coz the pain is really unbearable. And also in people who are terminally ill and who can't afford to pay the high hospital charges, is it not better that euthanasia is done so as to save the misery of the relatives who can't pay high medical bills. And terminally ill cancer patients undergo very severe pain. And we all know how painful the death is .The pain which he undergoes worth living for a few more days, when he'll be dying on his/her bed every moment. Isn't it better to free him from that prison of pain and sufferings if I think about this I feel, it should be allowed.

Against

• It can be misused.There must be strict laws pertaining on whom it can be done. And the decision should not be given to only one individual…he can misuse. There must be at least 2 other doctors who should also certify it, other than the treating doctor.
• People in favor of Euthanasia argue about the vegetable state of a person who needs the liberation. But the fact is, if Euthanasia is legalized there would not be any check on the circumstances under which a patient was killed/relieved. As we all know too well, how easy it is to buy professionals and their opinion. The intentions of legalizing Euthanasia may be Good but legalizing it would be to legalize killings. History is witness that legalizing killing (remember the Soviet gulag, the Nazi concentration camps, the killing fields of Cambodia) has dreadful consequences. If euthanasia is legalized then suicide must also be. The only difference is the former is assisted and the later is self inflicted.
• ON dec 21, 2006.Marico Ricco an Italian doctor disconnected a respirator that was keeping Piergiorgio Welby alive. After Ricco gave him the sedative and switched off the respirator, Webly smilingly said goodbye to his wife and kids and in 45 min he was dead. Webly's right to die was widely publicized in Italy. Here two questions arise: whether a person has the right to sustain life supporting medical treatment The other is whether voluntary euthanasia. is ethically defensible. But before such a law is implemented the must be strong legal framework on this; without any loopholes.
• Science is progressing at a massive rate. At any point of time a drug could come into the market which could save a person from a “terminal” illness. Every person desires to live, but in pain he loses the power to understand and decide about his life and nobody has the right to define someone else's destiny. So euthanasia should definitely find a way out of our dictionaries.

Conclusion

It could be disastrous law for human race so what is required here is to completely understand the process and only after that Euthanasia. Decision should be taken not by the local doctors. Government should deploy a centralized committee consisting of doctors and law makers and committee should make decision based on circumstances.