My goal: to share my ideas and opinions on the topic of Euthanasia


Blog #1


Euthanasia is defined as “the practice of intentionally ending a life in order to relieve pain and suffering”

I will first say that when first hearing about this I was completely against it. It makes me question the right of one human to take the life of another. But according to what it is defined as, I rethink my position. In the case of a person being terminally ill, suffering, could never possibly live on their own without being attached to a bunch of life-support machines and is destined to stay in a hospital for their remaining days, if they decide that they’re ready to move on because that is obviously what is meant to happen and they don’t want to waste the insurance money that could go to helping their family or something other than having laying in a hospital bed for the rest of their life, then why shouldn’t they be able to make that decision?

If they are thinking clearly and they feel like they don’t have anything else to offer to the world then they should be able to make that decision to no longer take part in it.

Let’s think first for an example a very wealthy person becomes terminally ill, and they’re using their fortune to pay their hospital bills for an illness they can never recover from. They’re laying in a hospital bed and there is no way they will be able to do anything else for the rest of their life.

With all due respect to people that “look out for number one” I would personally have more respect for someone who let their money go to something better than themselves laying in a hospital doing nothing for their remaining days.



Blog #2

rudolphs-articleInline.jpg
The Rudolphs

When first reading this it’s easy to think “wow this is kind of messed up” which in some aspect, it is. But really, it’s a loving couple who decide to die together in case their illnesses become “too overwhelming”. Why would someone want people to stay on this earth just to suffer? Dorothy Rudolph watched her mother suffer from bone cancer as she attempted to nurse her back to health and it was hard for the both of them. It was hard for her mother, to feel “pinned down” for her whole life and it was hard for Dorothy to see her mother that way. Why would anyone want to experience that? The greatest fear for Armond and Dorothy is that they would end up in nursing home; the thought of having no independence frightens them. The most interesting thing about this couple and their view on Euthanasia is that they are very educated the subject. They have read all kinds of literature, which they have introduced to their children. They have written advanced directives on the subject as well. When they say they are in support of Euthanasia, they know what they are talking about.


Span, Paula. "Deciding to Die, Then Shown the Door." The New Old Age Blog. New York Times, 24 Aug. 2011. Web. 11 May 2012. <http://newoldage.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/24/deciding-to-die-then-shown-the-door/?ref=euthanasia>.



Blog #3


There is a good side and a bad side to everything. Jack Kevorkian (lower right) was an American pathologist - a doctor that provides a diagnosis for their patients – who is commonly known for his support (to put it lightly) of Euthanasia. He has helped over 130 people to kill themselves. The worst part of what Dr. Kevorkian did was, in most of the cases the patients didn’t even have the idea to kill themselves. He would tell them about how their life isn’t worth living anymore because of whatever condition they had. I most definitely do not support this. Dr. Kevorkian’s youngest patient, Roosevelt Dawson, was 21 years old when he died. The worst part is that his condition wasn’t even life-threatening, he was a Quadriplegic. If a person has Quadriplegia it means that they have lost control of their torso and/or limbs so they may not be able to do all of the things they normally did before bu
jack-kevorkian.jpg
Dr. Jack Kevorkian
t that doesn’t mean their life should completely be over because of that. There are a lot Quadriplegics that just need little bit of extra help doing day to day things. Can what Dr. Kevorkian was doing even be considered euthanasia? Not really. As defined above euthanasia is performed to relieve pain and suffering and a number of Kevorkian's patients patients had never complained of any pain and a lot of them were not even terminally ill. There was another patient that he had that he diagnosed with AIDS when she was 27 years old. AIDS is not a condition that makes life not worth living anymore. There are restrictions on what one can and can't do if they have AIDS but just because someone has it that doesn't mean that they should call it quits on taking it one day at a time.


"Dr. Jack Kevorkian's Patient List." Web. <https://www.msu.edu/~wrigh196/atl/patients.html>.


Blog #4

Religion is what makes this topic a little bit sticky for me. I am a Christian but I have to say that I disagree with the Christian view on this particular topic – but I do see where the idea that Euthanasia is bad comes from after reading this.

According to the bible, killing oneself (euthanasia is used in the case of pain and suffering) is “illegal” for three reasons. The first reason is because every being is said to love itself, so it “resists corruptions as far as it can”.

-Well that’s a very nice way to look at it but if a being is suffering that doesn’t always reflect on the way it feels about itself. And a lot of patients that want to be euthanized cross-of-christ-0101.jpg’t hate themselves and can’t control whatever is making them suffer.

The second reason it is illegal to kill oneself is because every human is said to belong to the community and committing suicide would be injuring the community.

-I agree with that to some extent but euthanasia entails a doctor ending the life of someone that is suffering and wouldn’t a Christian community be happy to know that a member of their community is in heaven?

The third reason is the biggest reason that killing oneself is considered illegal. God creates humans to live and when that life is over is up to him and by taking your own life it is like saying that you didn’t trust God to make the decision of when your life should be over. The bible says that is up to God’s discretion what lives and what dies.

-that sounds pretty solid … if you don’t look at the big picture. A person is suffering… in a hospital... probably connected to a bunch of machines and an IV being kept alive by a bunch of human-made drugs. Anyone would be crazy to say that God doesn’t want the lives of those people to be over. It may be unnatural to end one’s life but is it also unnatural to keep them alive? By those means – absolutely.


Euthanasia and Christianity: Christian Views of Euthanasia and Suicide." Euthanasia and Christianity: Christian Views of Euthanasia and Suicide. 23 Dec. 2009. Web. 11 May 2012. <http://www.religionfacts.com/euthanasia/christianity.htm>.




Blog #5


The Hippocratic Oath is one taken by physicians and other health care professionals swearing to practice medicine ethically. It is believed to have been written by Hippocrates who is regarded as the “father of western medicine”. Over time the oath has been changed to a more modern version that is more appropriate for present use. In the original version each doctor was swearing the oath to a bunch of Greek Gods which obviously wouldn’t be okay in today’s society considering how many belief syst
170px-HippocraticOath.jpg
The Original Hippocratic Oath
ems there are.

__Original Oath and Modern Oath__

I can see so many holes in the modern version of the oath that support Euthanasia.

First one: “I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures [that] are required, avoiding those twin traps of over treatment and therapeutic nihilism.”

-therapeutic nihilism in simpler words is belief that a being (whether it is an individual or a society) cannot be cured of their ills. So basically every doctor will do their best to help every patient with their sickness. But the other “trap” they speak of in this section of the oath would be over treatment. If a person can’t survive on his or her own at all, and everything that a doctor is doing is the only thing keeping a patient alive, I would call that over treatment.

Second: “I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug.”

-I like that. I don’t think that every doctor d should be cold-hearted and easily give up on their patients. I just think that if they are at a point of no return, there is nothing anyone can do.

THIRD: “I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given to me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God.”

-There it is. Doctors recognize their power to take a life when they swear to this oath. They recognize that there are in fact times where they don’t really have a choice but to take a life. They don’t see this power as something to take advantage of. I’m not saying that there are doctors that wouldn’t do that but of course I don’t support that.


Collier, P.F. "The Hippocratic Oath." The Hippocratic Oath. National Kidney and Transplant Division of Urology, 17 Jan. 1999. Web. 15 May 2012. <http://nktiuro.tripod.com/hippocra.htm>.






Blog #6


As I have made pretty clear in my previous posts, I am in support of Euthanasia – to an extent. In the Netherlands they are a bit more open-minded than we are here in the United States. They have legalized Marijuana and Prostitution according to this article, but these things are closely regulated. Among these legalized things, is Euthanasia, but this is just sad. There is a doctor in the Netherlands that is taking things to a whole other level! She is in support of euthanizing everyone over the age of seventy, even if they aren’t sick! I definitely would call this mal-practice. She claims that having a law against euthanasia forces people to go through “unbearable suffering”. Last I checked, not every old person was suffering. This is so wrong. It is easy to see why this doctor feels this way though; both of her parents took their own lives in 2010.

de_jong.jpg
Dr. Petra de Jong

Her father was suffering from cancer and her mother ‘‘didn’t want to be alone,’’ she said, after a long life together. ‘‘They died in each others’ arms together in their bed. So suddenly my private life and

my work here came together. That was a bit strange.’’

This is what makes this so horrible. It’s not that Dr. de Jong isn’t a good doctor, it’s that she let her personal life interfere in her work life to such an extreme level.


Jolly, David. "Inside a Story About Helping the Elderly to Die." Http:rendezvous.blogs.nytimes.com/. New York Times, 3 Apr. 2012. Web. 17 May 2012. <http://rendezvous.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/03/inside-a-story-about-helping-the-elderly-to-die/?ref=euthanasia>.


Blog #7


paul_byrne.jpg
Paul Byrne, M.D.


Euthanasia, however, has as much to do with the ballyhooed "right to die" as abortion has to do with the equally amoral and inane slogan "freedom of choice." The plain truth is that euthanasia, like abortion, is something done to, not chosen by, its victims.

-Paul Byrne, M.D.

I find it interesting how this doctor calls freedom of choice amoral and inane. What does that even mean? That people shouldn’t have a choice? Having freedom of choice isn’t moral? Isn’t that what America is all about? Making your own choices within a specific set of guidelines (and by guidelines I mean the Constitution – what we base everything around in this country)?

Secondly I don’t understand how this doctor can say euthanasia is not chosen by its “victims”. That’s the whole point! Part of the article is called “Before You Sign…” which in itself implies that the patient is willing to die. They’re the ones signing their life away, clearly they are aware of what they are doing and if they are not then they shouldn’t be signing.

This article assumes that all doctors that support euthanasia are like Jack Kevorkian which is completely untrue. Honestly I bet if this doctor were to go through what some of these people that are terminally ill go through pain-wise that he would never say this. For anyone that has seen a suffering cancer patient with their own two eyes knows exactly what I’m talking about. We are lucky to live in a world with so many treatments and cures but there comes a point of no return. For anyone who has even been in a hospital for more than a few weeks, is it not torture? Well imagine doing that for the rest of your life.


Byrne, Paul A. "Before You Sign...On the Dotted Line." Life Matters. Citizens United Resisting Euthanasia (CURE), Winter 1992. Web. 17 May 2012. <http://mysite.verizon.net/cureltd/id24.html>.


Blog #8


The stories from this website are truly interesting. One is of a minister whose wife went into a coma for forty-seven days which was induced by a stroke. He decided that she should be taken off of life support after Mercy Hospital told him that she was clinically brain dead and would be a candidate for organ donations. He was denied this request to have her taken off of life support and six days later she recovered from her coma, the minister is standing by the fact that he was willing to let her die.

I don’t see anything wrong with that. The hospital told the minister that his wife was clinically brain dead, which means the only thing keeping her alive was a bunch of machines. Also, the hospital told the minister that his wife would be a good candidate for organ donations. What is wrong with that? Her organs could have been really beneficial for a good amount of people that are dying. Who would get the best use out of those organs? Someone that’s in a coma and clinically brain dead? Or someone that needs a new kidney? And it’s not like the day after she went into the coma he was like “alright, yank that plug! She’s outta here!” He waited forty-seven days, which I’m sure was very hard for him. And after all of that time he thought she was never coming back and it was just a waste to keep her there.

I’m not going to say that God put Jacqueline Cole (the minister’s wife) in a coma but there are so many people that need new organs and it’s kind of selfish to keep someone that could be of help to that problem alive for nothing if they are just going to be a vegetable in a hospital while someone else is dying and could use what they have.



American Life League. "CHAPTER 106." CHAPTER 106//. American Life League BBS. Web. 17 May 2012. <http://www.ewtn.com/library/PROLENC/ENCYC106.htm>.

For more on my topic: http://euthanasia.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000126