Although it is considered illegal, a form of Euthanasia is already present within the United States. It can be classified in different ways, one of which is called "Passive Euthanasia". According to the article, the term can be described as "a person [who] causes death by withholding or withdrawing treatment that is necessary to maintain life". Doctors give an option to the patient about whether or not they want to proceed with treatment. In some cases, patients choose to withhold help which they could receive, mainly because of the fact that they do not want to put their body through any further pain. The main idea which should be taken through these facts is that instead of having a patient stop treatment and suffer through the rest of their remaining life, it would be more humane to let them take sedatives so they could be put to sleep. It would be a quicker and less unpleasant death.
Euthanasia should be considered legal in the U.S. People should be able to choose to take their own life if they have a terminally ill disease. This is because eventually, their disease will shorten and claim their life. According to the article, patients should have a choice to do whatever they desire with their life and they should not be "unnecessarily kept alive against [their] own will." Furthermore, if it is done in the presence of professionals, then it is not considered suicide because you are not taking your own life, someone else is doing it for you, given your written consent. Doctors would be following the patients' preferences, which is encourage here in the U.S.
This article argues furthermore on why the legalization of Euthanasia should be enforced as a law. Through the many reasons provided, one that should stand out to the reader is when the topic of Human Rights is brought up. The European Convention on Human Rights was brought into play for this argument. It states that humans have the Right to Life and the Right to Private and Family Life. Dr. Kailash Chand states that the Right to Life also includes the quality of life. Therefore, someone who has to endure the physical pain of having a terminally ill disease is sure to be living a poor life. Since the quality of life falls under the Right to Life, he argues that a patient should be allowed to "make decisions about life if the life is no longer one of quality". Meaning, they should have the choice to turn towards death if their life is no longer worth living.
Interpreting can help someone go a long way in understanding some situations. A few physicians got together to speak to Dave Anderson, the writer of this article, on reasons why Euthanasia should be legalized. The number one reason to support their claim is that "The Hippocratic Oath Supports Euthanasia". "The key element of the oath is that the physician must protect the well being of their patient." In most cases, this refers to the doctor doing whatever possible to keep the patient alive. However, if the patient has to choose between intense suffering or death, it can be argued that the doctor would be doing more harm by NOT allowing them to die. Interpreting The Oath in this way can support the arguments for legalization of Euthanasia.
More support is given towards this controversial topic as the article states that, "Euthanasia may be necessary for the fair distribution of health resources". Points that were made are understandable. According to this article, "In most countries there is a shortage of health resources." This issue can be prevented through the enforcement of physician assisted suicide. As a result of this issue, patients with the potential of being fully recovered are not receiving all the help due to lack of resources. Whereas, people who are already terminally ill with no wish to continue further treatment are getting all the help. It would make more logical sense to allow those who choose death over suffering to make their decision and for the health resources to go to people who can benefit from it.