Coope, Christopher Mill. “Death with dignity.” Hastings Center Report, 27.5, (2007): 37.
This is an argument about the greatest disadvantage about euthanasia. It makes the people think that the only ay to die with dignity is by going to euthanasia. This is quiet misleading. As opposed to this option, the author argues that the best way is to give the different options on how to die with dignity.
This paper will help in developing an argument against euthanasia. It indicates that the practice tends tow whitewash the minds of the patients and the medical practitioners, thereby blinding them to the fact that there are other options to die with dignity.
Benedict, Susan, et al. Duty and 'Euthanasia': The Nurses Of Meseritz-Obrawalde. Nursing Ethics, 14.6 (2007): 781-794.
This is a case that helps to assert the fact that euthanasia is a very controversial issue in medicine. It is a discussion of the testimonies of nurses given by the nurses who killed many people in the German camps. The nurses argued that the rationale behind the killings were that the patients would benefit from their death or because they got orders from the doctors. This is despite the fact that some of these could have been inappropriate.
Looking at this perspective, it is arguable that legalization of euthanasia is a gamble not worth taking. This is because some of the medical practitioners can use it maliciously to kill some people. This loop-hole should not be created through legal provisions.
Boonin, David. “How to Argue Against Active Euthanasia.” Journal of Applied Philosophy, 17. 2 (2000), p157.
This is generally an argument about the advantages and disadvantages of euthanasia. It indicates that many of the modern day arguments against active euthanasia are based on the traditional approach to the issue. However, the author looks at the arguments for and against the issue. This leads to a conclusion that euthanasia is indeed beneficial and should be used as a last option in palliative care.
This argument is very important in my work. Not only does it give an insight into the issue, it also gives a possible way in which the argument can be structured. This is an insightful paper that would be quite influential in my research.
De Graeff, Alexander. “Palliative Sedation Therapy in the Last Weeks of Life: A Literature Review and Recommendations for Standards.” Journal of Palliative Medicine, 10.1, (2007): 67-85.
This is an argument about euthanasia as one of the options in palliative care. The study indicates that the main reason as to why PST is required is to alleviate pain and suffering for the patients. It so happens that in a bid to prevent the pain and suffering, PST is taken as the last option when all other means of alleviating pain fail. As such, though controversial, it should be legalized but with restricting legal provisions.
Dickey, Nancy W. “Euthanasia: A concept whose time has come?” Issues in Law & Medicine, 8.4, (2003): 521.
This is a research activity that gives both the positive and negative aspects of euthanasia. The benefits include relief of unbearable pain and suffering for the patient. On the contrary, there are arguments about its disadvantages such as the argument that it leads to a breach of ethical conduct and respect for human life. The greatest opposition comes from the religious circles which vehemently denounce euthanasia.
This argument indicates that the benefits of euthanasia are much outweighed by the negatives. As such, it should not be allowed. It gives a chance for multiple abuses by the medical practitioners. As such, it should not be legalized.
Emanuel, Ezekiel J. “What is the great benefit of legalizing euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide?” Ethics, 109.3 (2009), p629.
This article looks at the benefits that can be derived from euthanasia of physician assisted suicide. The author argues that there are some benefits such as autonomy, relief from pain and suffering, as well as psychological reassurance. There are also some potential harm such as the inequitable distribution of the benefits and harms associated with legalization.
This article is important because it gives both sides of the argument; the good and the bad. As such, it can be used in weighing between the pros and cons and coming up with the right judgment and conclusion on the issue.
Fenigsen, Richard. “Other People's Lives: Reflections on Medicine, Ethics, and Euthanasia: Part Two: Medicine Versus Euthanasia.” Issues in Law & Medicine, 27.1, (2011): 51-70.
This is an edition in a series of analysis of euthanasia in medicine. In this case, the author seeks to find out whether euthanasia can be termed as a thorn in the medical field. This analysis, therefore, seeks to find out the core issues in about euthanasia.
This article will be of importance in laying out the foundation for the argument. By giving solid facts on euthanasia and its relation to the medical field, it acts as a foundation from which the argument can be built.
Feningsen, Richard. “Other People's Lives: Reflections on Medicine, Ethics, and Euthanasia. Part Two: Medicine Versus Euthanasia.” Issues in Law & Medicine, 28.1 (2012): 71-87.
This research is an analysis of the ethical values that have to be observed by practitioners in the medical field. It indicates that the practitioners have to be very particular on the health related issues of their patients to help avoid controversial situations.
This article will be of importance in my research because it will help in understanding the reasons as to why euthanasia is such a controversial issue in medicine. The article lays the foundation for the argument.
Gielen, J. “Flemish palliative care nurses' attitudes toward euthanasia: a quantitative study.” International Journal of Palliative Nursing, 15.10, (2009): 488-97.
This is a study aimed at investigating whether requests for euthanasia are associated with the kind of palliative services offered. The study indicates that once the quality of healthcare services improved, the requests for euthanasia greatly reduced. This is indicative of the fact that sound health services should be offered rather than going for the euthanasia option.
This source will be effective in propagating an argument against euthanasia. It indicates that the disadvantage of euthanasia is that it causes a lax in palliative care givers. As such, focus should be n improving these services rather than on euthanasia.
Hay, Gilbert. “Euthanasia.” American Journal of Medicine, 23.1 (2012): 12-15.
This article is an overview of euthanasia as a medical intervention. It does not incline to any direction. Rather, it gives a generalized view on euthanasia. It explores the history of the practice and how it has been used. It also looks at the instances under which it can be applied.
This overview is important in understanding euthanasia. Before the argument is developed, there is a need to come up with a clear understanding of the issue at hand. This is the purpose of this article in my research.
Kamath, Sneha et al. “Attitudes Toward Euthanasia Among Doctors in a Tertiary Care Hospital in South India: A Cross Sectional Study.” Indian Journal of Palliative Care, 17.3 (2011): 197-201.
This study looks at the perception of euthanasia by medical practitioners based on the benefits of euthanasia. Euthanasia helps in relieving unbearable pain and suffering. As such, doctors support it.
The article will be of importance in asserting that euthanasia is indeed beneficial to alleviate human suffering. It also gives a response to the religious arguments about euthanasia, putting it that the practice helps in making death more peaceful.
Keown, John. “Euthanasia, Ethics and Public Policy: An Argument against Legislation.” Journal of Legal Medicine, 24.3, (2003), p395.
This article is a summary of the book “Euthanasia, Ethics and Public Policy: An Argument Against Legislation," by Dorothy Rasinski Gregory. As such, it obviously talks against the legalization of euthanasia. It indicates that the practice gives the practitioners a chance to act unethically.
With no doubt, this paper will be used in looking at the negative side of euthanasia. It indicates that legislation for euthanasia would be a big mistake. As such, it should not be legalized.
Math, Suresh Bada, & Chaturvedi, Santosh K. Euthanasia: Right to life vs. right to die. Indian Journal of Medical Research, 136.6, (2012), p899-902.
This is an argument that lays down the hard facts on euthanasia. On the positive, it indicates that there are a number of disadvantages against euthanasia. First of all, it is wrong with reference to the paradigm of life. It also argues that there is importance to take care of the sick. It also brings out the immorality of killing individuals just because they have debilitating illnesses. The only argument for euthanasia is that it helps in attaining a dignified death.
With all the negative arguments, the article clearly indicates that euthanasia has more negative effects than positive ones. As such, there should be no legalization of the practice.
McGee, Andrew. “Me and My Body: The Relevance of the Distinction for the Difference between Withdrawing Life Support and Euthanasia.” Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 39.4, (2011): 671-7.
This article takes a philosophical perspective on euthanasia. It explains that euthanasia and withdrawal of life support machines are two distinct factors. Therefore, euthanasia cannot be termed as withdrawal of support to the patient, hence can be legalized.
This source will be important in giving a multi-dimensional approach to the topic. It indicates that euthanasia is not philosophically wrong, hence can be legalized.
Poreddi, Vijayalakshmi et al. “Euthanasia: the perceptions of nurses in India”. International Journal of Palliative Nursing, 19.4 (2012): 187-93.
This study was carried out on the perception of euthanasia by nursing professionals in India. It looked at the legal, ethical, religious, and moral circumstances which make euthanasia such a controversy. The conclusion was that more needs to be done in order to find a common ground on euthanasia.
This paper will be effective in laying out an argument. It gives the hard details about euthanasia and the fact that it is not highly accepted, hence should not be legalized.
Woien, Sandra. “Life, Death, and Harm: Staying Within the Boundaries of Nonmaleficence.” American Journal of Bioethics, 8.11, (2008), p31-32.
This is an argument about the benefits of euthanasia. It is base don the ethical argument that is based on the principle of nonmalificence. This has it that everyone has an obligation not to hurt others. Under such circumstances, it argues that euthanasia helps in eliminating hopeless and unbearable suffering.