The Instigator
stonemmsc2015
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
wowmasterolearyshane2015
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Euthanasia Legality?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/18/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 914 times Debate No: 71922
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (15)
Votes (0)

 

stonemmsc2015

Con

Euthanasia should be illegal in the United States because it is against the Hippocratic oath that doctor's take when they graduate medical school and become a doctor. It is the responsibility of the doctor to save lives of patients not take them. There are new advances in medicines everyday so there could be a cure for a terminally ill patient.
wowmasterolearyshane2015

Pro

Euthanasia is not decided by the doctor. It is decided by the family to allow the patient a quick and painless death rather than constant worries and hospital visits. Although not recommended, euthanasia is sometimes best for terminal patients because a lot of the illnesses are not able to be cured but put dormant. There is always a risk of problems and the medicine can both fail and be a waste of a lot of money.
Debate Round No. 1
stonemmsc2015

Con

The family may want/decide to have the doctor take the patients life to stop the suffering, but the doctor has to have the utmost respect for human life. Euthanasia is morally wrong and there is a reason doctor's have the oath in the first place. Euthanasia brings a moral burden to the doctor and the family because they have just ended someone's life unnaturally. The cure for the person's disease could come out the next day and the family members and the doctor would feel terrible.
wowmasterolearyshane2015

Pro

First, it takes over 10 years to create vaccines for normal illnesses. Terminal illnesses are much harder to find cures for and may never find cures for some. The question is not on morality of the subject, rather the choice whether or not to suffer through a painful illness.
Debate Round No. 2
stonemmsc2015

Con

It may take years to create a cure, but medicine still advances. They have found ways to slow some terminal illness down. For example, Multiple Sclerosis is a terminal disease, but it has many drugs that slow down the progression of the disease which therefore gives people more time. During this time researchers may find a cure and that person can go on continuing their life instead of ending it. Morality may have not been the right term to use but there is a psychological shock to the doctor.
wowmasterolearyshane2015

Pro

Even thought doctors can slow down the effects or sideffects of an illness, a person still might not be able to live to see the cure of their illness. Also, most families that due result with the euthanasia as a way out for a person's illness, is determined if the person is living suffering without a chance of getting better. To say that a doctor might suffer from psychological shock from doing their job is not an excuse because soldiers get ptsd's and they just live with it.
Debate Round No. 3
stonemmsc2015

Con

stonemmsc2015 forfeited this round.
wowmasterolearyshane2015

Pro

wowmasterolearyshane2015 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
stonemmsc2015

Con

First of all soldiers who have been diagnosed with ptsd have it way worse than the doctors preforming Euthanasia and should not just have to live with it. Second of all the person may live to see the cure we never know until the cure is found. While I agree with your point about the suffering who knows that they won't have a chance to get better in a day, week, month, etc. we just don't know. It would be devastating to put a family member to death and find out a week later there is a cure.
wowmasterolearyshane2015

Pro

wowmasterolearyshane2015 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by desaulnierspmsc2014 2 years ago
desaulnierspmsc2014
Con argument presented better arguments
Posted by Curran2015 2 years ago
Curran2015
I strongly believe that this should be left up to the relatives of the patient if they are unable to make their own decision. If they are able to make their own decision then it should be left up to the patient. I do not believe that the government has the right to tell a person that they can't end their own life to end or avoid intense suffering. All in all, I would say that there is no doubt that this decision should be left to the people involved in these extremely personal situations, and that everyone else should respect the people involved and stay out of it.
Posted by UttermannMCS15 2 years ago
UttermannMCS15
The con argument that was put forward made a much stronger case in my opinion.
Posted by dayawjmsc2015 2 years ago
dayawjmsc2015
I agree with that fact that Euthanasia should not be illegal and should be the choice of the person. It is up to the person to choice what they believe is best. The doctors do have to take into consideration the wishes of the patients and of the family that are placed in the situation. I agree as well with the thought of exploring other options before the final step towards Euthanasia.
Posted by LeemingMSC15 2 years ago
LeemingMSC15
It should not be illegal to bring comfort to one. If that comfort is brought by using Euthanasia then so be it.
Posted by WardMSC2015 2 years ago
WardMSC2015
Euthanasia should be used, only if all options have been experimented with beforehand. In the end, a persons own fate should lie in their own hands. The choice to take ones own life is only that persons option. Although society does not accept suicide as morally right, we also do not except the suffering of a human life. If all options are exhausted, and the person is 18 or older, it is up to them. As for the doctor, they do not have to "pull the plug", if not comfortable with that. They can always hand off the "deed".
Posted by WardMSC2015 2 years ago
WardMSC2015
Euthanasia should be used, only if all options have been experimented with beforehand. In the end, a persons own fate should lie in their own hands. The choice to take ones own life is only that persons option. Although society does not accept suicide as morally right, we also do not except the suffering of a human life. If all options are exhausted, and the person is 18 or older, it is up to them. As for the doctor, they do not have to "pull the plug", if not comfortable with that. They can always hand off the "deed".
Posted by Cohenmsc2015 2 years ago
Cohenmsc2015
Going off DayawKmsc2015's comment I agree that all options, both experimental and not, should be considered before Euthanasia is even on the table. Also calling Euthanasia a form of suicide is like saying that choosing to wear a do not resuscitate bracelet is committing suicide.
Posted by DayawKmsc2015 2 years ago
DayawKmsc2015
I agree with the comment below me. I think that Euthanasia should be the person's choice. I view that and suicide to be different things because these people are in physical pain. I personally think they should be given other (experimental options if necessary) options before the choice of Euthanasia is given.
Posted by MeehanMSC2015 2 years ago
MeehanMSC2015
Euthanasia should be the individual's choice. If someone is suffering why make them suffer in a bed for weeks and weeks? It gets to a point where the individual is in so much pain they cant do anything, why not let them rest on their own terms.
No votes have been placed for this debate.