Active euthanasia will promote the development of a society that gives priority to economic returns over individual freedom.A major concern is that many medical decisions are financial as well and as such, active euthanasia might be abused out of financial considerations.Tags: Great Argument EssaysColeman Mach Thermostat Problem SolvingGhostwriter For HireEnglish Creative Writing MajorUseful Formula For Thesis StatementsEssay About A Memory Of My ChildhoodSample Research Project ProposalShould Teachers Assign Homework
Allowing active euthanasia would justify the killing of people who are regarded as unfit to live.
Active euthanasia is not a pragmatic practice since it might reduce the future efficiency of the doctor due to stress.
This has caused a considerable amount of debate on the issue of active euthanasia (doctor assisted suicide) throughout the world.
Advocates of active euthanasia claim that in some situations, it is not only right but also the moral thing for the physician to assist the patient to commit suicide.
This outlook is in line with Kant’s theory of categorical imperative, which declares that the right action is the one that follows the rules in place.
Even in instances where physicians feel justified to assist a patient end his/her life because of their terminal illness, they should not since the law prohibits this act.
If physicians are allowed to kill terminally ill patients who choose to have their lives ended voluntarily, it can eventually lead to a situation where doctors kill patients with similar illnesses who might not necessary want to die.
The integrity of the medical profession would be greatly damaged if active euthanasia were encouraged.
From a utilitarian approach, active euthanasia is therefore not moral.
Aiding, abetting or assisting in the death of a person through active euthanasia is a crime in most countries and this law applies also for physicians who are handling dying patients who are suffering and asking for help in dying.