Skip to main content

Should Euthanasia be legalized?

According to the International anti-euthanasia Task Force, “Euthanasia is defined as intentionally making someone die rather than allowing them to die naturally.” Euthanasia is a serious topic today. It is a crime rather than a cure and at the same time it is an answer to the suffering of the dying patient. This creates a controversy on whether euthanasia is good or bad. Thus, is euthanasia a solution to the torture of dying patients and their relatives, or is it just a way to eliminate bedridden patients?

Euthanasia relieves patients from severe pain permanently. If a terminal patient faces a long, slow, painful death, surely it is much kinder to spare them from this suffering and allow them to end their life comfortably. “O, let him pass. He hates him. That would upon the rack of this tough world. Stretch him out longer”, a phrase from a writing of Shakespeare, clearly says that instead of giving a painful death its better for a person to die with peace. A public opinion poll by Angus Reid, dated 26th July 2012, states that 80% respondents of Canada support Euthanasia. Similarly, according to the Gallop Poll, 54% of the people around the world support Euthanasia. So, euthanasia alleviates the unendurable sufferings of the dying patients.

Euthanasia reduces the medical expenses of a country. “Savings to governments could become a consideration. Drugs cost much less, making them far less expensive than providing medical cure” as written in an article by Rita Marker JD, Kathie Hamlen of International Task force on euthanasia and assisted suicide. This way euthanasia helps to save medical funds by cutting the amount of medical resource used by the sick patients who are usually incurable. Hence, euthanasia curbs down the medical expenses of a country and the savings can be utilized in alternative developmental projects.

In contrary, euthanasia may substitute the existing medical treatment because of its cheapness. In the US the drugs used for euthanasia cost around $35 whereas treatment cost will be significantly more expensive than this, and can amount to 35000 or 40000 United States Dollars depending upon the types and nature of the ailment. This vast difference of money can cause people to go for euthanasia rather than medical cure especially if the treatment is unaffordable. A study conducted on 2012 by Euthanasia Statistics found that 32 % of assisted deaths are done without the request of the patients but his/her relatives. This clearly shows that many are going for euthanasia rather than costly treatment process. Hence, in future euthanasia may turn to become a means of health care and contentment rather than a means of mercy killing.

Euthanasia is a rejection of importance or the value of human life. There is a verse in Bible which states, “You shall not murder”, whereas euthanasia violates this religious rule. It may seem to be related with right to freedom of people but it gradually devaluates human life. One cannot give up his life just in the name of some incurable disease. Similarly, if a patient cannot speak for himself, his/her relatives should not be given the right to decide whether to kill him or not. Again, doctors get the official license to kill people as it is in their discretionary power that the decision is taken. The unethical doctors and people can abuse this power, and even further reduce the value of human life.

In conclusion, euthanasia is a controversial topic with both merits and demerits. On one hand, it can relieve patients from their unendurable pain or suffering as well as cut down medical expenditure, but on the other hand, it depreciates the value of human life by providing a substitute to medical treatment in complicated cases and by providing room for unethical activities. If we go on to debate on the pros and cons, we will not be able to reach any specific conclusion. Therefore, what we should do is provide a special provision in the law to dispense euthanasia, only in the highly sensitive and demanding cases, under the direct but impartial and independent supervision of the government.

Author: Anamol Maharjan
AS level student at St. Xavier's College, Maitighar.
Kathmandu, Nepal.


  1. Really Good. Well Balanced and I enjoy reading it.

    Well even Islam rejects the idea of euthanasia.

  2. thnx 4 the guidance.
    really useful keep it up


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Probable Questions for October/November 2015

(Image Credit: Unknown) A continuity to the Tradition: Like in the past, I am attempting to predict (so to say) questions that could show up in the upcoming October/November examination of 2015. Disclaimer First: These predictions are in no way scientific or really probable. Justification: However, these could be some topics you could brainstorm and practice upon, in order to prepare for your General Paper exams.

Consider the view that the key to good health is not medicine, but lifestyle

Image by Irina L from Pixabay "Health is a state of complete physical, mental and social wellbeing, not merely an absence of disease or infirmity." - World Health Organization. This definition of health in its broadest sense implies that curing of physical diseases and abnormalities alone cannot earn us a good health. Can medicines go beyond curing diseases, to improve our health on the mental and social grounds? The medicines for the mental diseases, like depression, might improve our mental and social health to some extent; however, good health in its broadest sense can only be achieved through improved lifestyle.

Probable Question for Oct/Nov 2012

Disclaimer Notice First First of all, I would like to share something with you: I have tried to guess probable questions like this for four sessions with this one being the latest and in my past guess-works, what I have experienced is that most of the students blindly rely on them and prepare only on the topic areas listed here. And when the questions do not fall from the areas I have listed there they simply show aggression. One person wrote in my Facebook Group in a satirical manner that, “100% questions were asked from my predicted topics.” Now, read an article on another blog. Ms Adrienne de Souza writes how students get tricked by reading probable questions. She frankly says that her predictions have been wrong before , like mine! And I've always included "a note of warning/disclaimer" in each of the earlier predictions.