EssayOn criminal law

Subject: “Pro or Against Euthanasia”

Euthanasia implies an intentional termination of life by another at the explicit request of the person who wishes to die. Euthanasia is generally defined as the act of killing an incurably ill person out of concern and compassion for that person's suffering. Usually, it is separated into two categories: passive euthanasia and active euthanasia. In many jurisdictions, active euthanasia can be considered murder or Manslaughter, whereas passive euthanasia is accepted by professional medical societies, and by the law under certain circumstances.1

It can be comitted by action (such as giving the lethal injection) or omission (not providing the necessary care or food and water). 2 Due to the ethical and religios beliefs of the society, euthanasia remains one of the most complicated issues in the Medical domain. Even if, nowadays, many patients may be cured with the latest descoveries in treatments technology, doctors still are unable to find cure to all illnesses and in result many patients suffer extremely painful treatments that could only prolong their sufference for a while.

So talking about euthansia, we can see that there are 2 dominant possions, and namely:there are people who consider that euthanasia must be forbiden and those who consider that euthanasia must be legalised, but strongly regulated by the law.

Analysing the opinion of those people who think that euthanasia is a cirme, we will see that it is basically based on the religious belifs. In their opinion, life, which is a gift from God, can be taken only by Him. So, taking in account the fact that we and our body don’t belong to ourselves, we have no right to decide hoow long to live and how to die.

Another reason of many people to see euthanasia as a crime is the fear that the state wouldn’t be able to control the situation. This means that if the euthanasia will be legalised, the doctors will have the possibility to decide when the patients life is not worthy anymore, especially in the cases of poor people who have no any medical insurance but need an expensive treatment So, exists the risk that euthanasia would not be only for people who are "terminally ill.

The other reason is the fact that euthanasia can become from voluntary to involuntary. Volitive character of the euthanasia is one of those specific features that make it different from any others crimes – the victim expresses his/her desire to die. This will must have an express character and the person has to realise clearly what he/she really wants, because there situations when in a state of depression or any other emotional or psychological presure he/she cannot think rational and as a result thinks that euthanasia is the best or even the unique solution.

Another argument, a legal one, shows us that the criminal law aims to protect the main aims of the state. One of those values is the human beings’ life. Euthanasia infringes this value. In order to debate this argument, those people who suport the ideat that the euthanasia must be legalised, compared it with the self defence. This is one of the cases when is allowed to take a human life under certain circumstances. The difference between these 2 situations is that in the case of self-defence, the person is killing someone with the aim to save the life of someone else. While, in the case of euthanasia life is taken but no one’s life is saved.

So far, due to the fact that History shows us how dangerous euthanasia could be, only 2 countries in the entire world legalised it. During centuries, almost of the societies, even non-religious ones considered euthanasia as a crime.

There are many arguments that try to convince us that euthanasia is a crime and it should remain so. But even so people who have experienced this case say that euthanasia is the best option for the patient and the family. When tha patient has an incurable illness and is suffering, there are many reasons why family must choose the euthanasia. This opinion also is suported by many cases that appeared in practice.

11 http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/euthanasia2 http://www.euthanasia.com/definitions.html

There are many cases when the person has unbearable pain or because of severe traumas or affections of any vital organs, his/her life become miserable. Being in the situation when the painkillers don’t help at all or being totally imovable and helpless, he/she starts to hate him/herself and the entire world and the unique solution seen by seen by him/her is the euthanasia. This situation is very difficult not only for that person but for his/her family. There many cases when the person has unbearable pain or because of severe traumas or affections of any vital organs, his/her life become miserable. Being in the situation when the painkillers don’t help at all or being totally imovable and helpless, he/she starts to hate him/herself and the entire world and the unique solution seen by seen by him/her is the euthanasia. This situation is very difficult not only for that person but for his/her family. It is very difficult for the family to accept the death of a beloved person, but seeing his/her sufference, in the end they decide to suport and respect his/her decision. The Tony Nicklinson’s is one of those dramatic cases that show us that there are desperate situations, when the euthanasia is the best solution for the ill person and for his/her family. He suffered from "locked-in" syndrome following a massive stroke he suffered while he was on a business trip in Greece in 2005. He was paralysed from the neck-down, and could only communicate via a voice-synthesiser that registers blinking. So that means, that he needed someone to do everything for him. He was frustrated by the fact that he couldn’t normaly express his opinion, the only way of conversation with others was the board or computer, thing that was useless in those case when he wanted to make a point. He launched a legal action seeking the right for a doctor to be able to lawfully end his life, which he sumed up as "dull, miserable, demeaning, undignified and intolerable", and have a "common law defence of necessity" against any murder charge. He didn’t want immediately to die, but he wanted to have the permission to do it in the moment when he would consider it necessary. He had the suport of his 2 daughters and wife. This situation was very difficult for all of them - he sufered because he wasn’t able to do something by himself and also to see how difficult is for his wife to care of him 24 hour a day, while his wife and daughters sufered because they lived his illness with him and saw how much he sufered because of his helplessness.3

In August 2012, Tony Nicklinson lost his High Court case to allow doctors to end his life. From that moment he had refused food and fluids. And unfortunatly a week later he died. His lawyers said the Court denied their client "the opportunity to take the necessary steps to end his own life".

Analysing this case, we see how desperate was this person and how cruel was to forbid him to die with dignity. He found a way to kill himself, a very painful and difficult way that could be avoided if the Court allowed doctor to end lawfully his life.

So analysing this case and many others, and also also al the arguments against euthanasia, I think that Euthanasia must be legalised. My opinion is based on several factors:

Can quickly and humanely end a patient’s suffering, allowing them to die with dignity – when the person has a life that is hardly to be called so or he/sufers of a terrible pain is better to die becuase they have less sufferance. It is kinder to allow him/her to die with dignity than to force them to continue his/her life in a continuos suference. Sometimes when patients have the opportunity to decide if they want euthanasia, the family should respect their decision. If they are choosing euthanasia is because they are suffering a lot. Illnesses like cancer or paralysis are very painful and traumatic, and when there is not cure for them it is better to practice euthanasia, a way in which could be reduced the long and painful time before the patient dies.

Can help to shorten the grief and suffering of the patient’s loved ones - Another important reason for which euthanasia is the best option is because it reduces family's sufferance. After the patient decides for euthanasia there are some families who don't want to do it, but they are harming the patient and themselves. When someone gets an incurable illness is like the whole family were having the same. That is because parents, brothers, and all relatives must

3 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-18398797

support the patient and they are living the illness with the patient. It would be better that the family chooses euthanasia for not to be suffering for a long time the patient and them.

Everyone has the right to decide how they should die – this principle is provided even by the international regulations. Each person has the right to control his/her live and body and so should be able to determine at what time, in what way and by whose hand he or she will die.

Death is a private matter, and if you are not hurting anyone else, the state should not interfere – the law protects the human life as one of the main values of the state, so the state protects the life of its citizens and punishes those who infringe the law. But the state doesn’t punish those who tried to kill themselves without hurting anyone else. Suicide attempts to those values that are protected by the criminal code but even so is not incriminated by it, beacause the person attempt only on his her life. Euthanasia also attempts only to that person who wants to die, without hurting others, promoting the best interest of anyone involved.

Most people would have their pets put down if they were suffering – this would be regarded as kindness. Why can’t the same kindness be given to humans? – If it is so intolerable to see someone’s pain, can we even imagine how unbearable is to be in his/her place? Can we be more kinder and to let him/her to decide his/her destiny?

Illness can take away autonomy (the ability to make choices) and dignity, leaving you with no quality of life; euthanasia allows you to take back control in deciding to die – It is injust and unfair to forbide ill people the right to die with dignity. A healthy person, who has no such serios reasons to kill him/herselves have the right to it, while a person who sufers a lot and the death is the unique way to end suffering has no such right.

In conclusion, euthanasia has no only positive or negative sides. That’s why I think that it must be analysed in each situation. Because there are a lot of desperate cases when the euthanasia is the unique way for the incurable ill person and his family to end their pain and suffering. That’s why I think that the euthanasia must be legalised and rigorously regulated by the state, establishing all the circumstances that must pe present and all the conditions that must be fullfiled by the participants in order comitt a legal euthanasia and not a crime.