The Instigator
eheinrichs19
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
lannan13
Con (against)
Winning
13 Points

Euthanasia, is it good or bad?

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 3 votes the winner is...
lannan13
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/11/2015 Category: Health
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,763 times Debate No: 69841
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (5)
Votes (3)

 

eheinrichs19

Pro

I believe that Euthanasia is okay unless it is for another reason. Euthanasia can help someone who is suffering with cancer and cannot talk, see, hear, taste, and feel. You may be brain dead, you have nothing you can do, so you could decide to let them go. Euthanasia is good because the person, or animal suffering shouldn't have to suffer more. Some people on another debate state "It is a quick and painless death. This is better than having to die slowly in pain and fighting", said by a 21 year old. This could relieve burden from relatives they can know they are not in pain anymore.
lannan13

Con

I accept this debate.

My opponent may argue first.
Debate Round No. 1
eheinrichs19

Pro

I believe that Euthanasia is right, only in certain ways. If you think of it as murder, that would not be good. Maybe if you think of it as someone suffering through a really slow, long painful death. You might want to consider researching the part of helping the people that are suffering. It is their choice, unless they are suffering terribly they might as well think about it right away. Euthanasia is a quick, non-painful death.

Facts-
The total percentage of practitioners that support Euthanasia: 54%

Percent of public who support Euthanasia for terminally ill/on life support: 86%

Average percent of of terminally ill patients who die of pain: 55%

http://www.statisticbrain.com...

Total number of places that openly and legally authorize active assistance in dying: Oregon, Switzerland, Belgium, and Netherlands.

Total percent of Republicans who oppose Euthanasia: 51%

Total percent of Democrats who oppose Euthanasia: 47%

How many support: 42%
How many oppose: 37%
How many are unsure: 22%
lannan13

Con

Contention 1: Unreported Euthanasia and Euthanasia without consent.

I shall begin by giving you the horrible statistics of Euthanasia. [1]) Approximately 900 euthanasia's a year are done without the consent of the one being euthanized and 50% of euthanasizations are done unreported. In 2005, it was reported that 1.7% of the nation's deaths were caused by Euthanasia, a total of 2,410 people. 1 out of every 5 people who receive euthanasia are done without consent. [2] A study in Belgium reported that 32% were without consent.

.

Contention 2: The Slippery Slope Argument

Keown gives in his slippery slope argument of 2002, that once one form of euthanasia is accepted that other forms, like involuntary euthanasia, to become legal. For my number one example I present the Dutch. In 1987, the Royal Dutch Medical Association had written into law, “If there is no request from the patient, then proceeding with the termination of his life is [juristically] a matter of murder or killing, and not of euthanasia.” However, in 2001 they supported a new law that completely supported a law that would legalize non-voluntary and involuntary euthanasia. [3] .) There 2001 law also permitted children from age 12-16 to be euthanized with parental concent! Though the nation does not consider the child at liberty to make the call. [4]

The euthanasia’s in Belgium have doubled since 1998. The involuntary and non-voluntary euthanasia rates have slightly increased from 1.5% in 2001 to 1.8% in 2007. In Flanders the euthanasia numbers have increased from 0.3% in 2001 to 1.9% in 2007. In the graph bellow we can see that the number of euthanasia’s have doubled since 2007 as well.

The definition of Euthanasia has actually changed over the years from it being killing in 1950 to a quick and easy death in 1981. In the bellow quote we can see that our perspective has changed to the point that we almost do not even associate death with euthanasia in the definition.

""Have we really forgotten that euthanasia is killing?"

From a pre-1950 dictionary: "Mode or act of inducing death painlessly or as a relief from pain."

From Webster's Third International Unabridged Dictionary (1968): "1. An easy death or means of inducing one. 2. The act or practice of painlessly putting to death persons suffering from incurable conditions or diseases."

From Taber's Cyclopedic Medical Dictionary (1981): "1. Dying easily, quietly and painlessly. 2. The act of willfully ending life in individuals with an incurable disease" [5]

You are also given the healing doctor a killing roll. This can have a huge effect on doctors as it was proved that it has an effect on doctors who are supposed to heal their patients and are now asked to kill. This also gives off a fear of the doctor as in Holland, the elderly are scared of the doctor, because they are scared that the doctor will euthanize them. [6] We can also see that doctors themselves oppose euthanasia.


Physician-Assisted Suicide [euthanasia]:
  • 42% Had both a "religious and nonreligious objection" to physician-assisted suicide
  • 31% Had "no objection" to physician-assisted suicide
  • 21% Had a "nonreligious objection" to physician-assisted suicide
  • 5% Had a "religious objection" to physician-assisted suicide

Physician Characteristics:

  • 79% of Asian doctors in the US object to physician-assisted suicide
  • 71% of Hispanic doctors in the US object to physician-assisted suicide
  • 67% of White doctors in the US object to physician-assisted suicide
  • 65% of Black doctors in the US object to physician-assisted suicide
  • 79% of Catholic doctors object to physician-assisted suicide
  • 79% of Muslim doctors object to physician-assisted suicide
  • 75% of Protestant doctors object to physician-assisted suicide
  • 74% of Hindu doctors object to physician-assisted suicide
  • 54% of Jewish doctors object to physician-assisted suicide
  • 39% of doctors with no religious affiliation object to physician-assisted suicide
  • Physicians from the US Midwest are more likely to object to physician-assisted suicide than those from the US South

[7] and [8]

Contention 3: Self Ownership and Sickness

Consent from a palliative specialist is also very important, but recent euthanasia’s have not been doing so and consenting them. In Belgium, before 2002, all euthanasia cases without concent of a palliative specialist were denied, but from 2002-2007, that number declined from 100% to only 9% as only 19% of all euthanasia cases was a palliative contacted for their opinion. (Same source as the first one used in this round)

Now I know that my opponent is against some of these, but this plays a key factor in my slippery slope argument that I will get into next. In 2003, Terri Schiavo recovered from a vegetative state that she had been in for 13 years. She had been dubbed dying, but she began to recover and eventually died on TV. They had removed her feeding tube and she had been without food and water for a few days even when she began to show signs of recovery. This is an event that occurred in the United States and we can see how this can easily go wrong when we try to give someone a peaceful end. In New York, Dr. Dimancescu's program has increased the ability for patients to get out of comas by a total of 91% compared to regular machines which have only 11%. [9]

For this next part I will argue that of self-determination. The reason I say that only those who are faced with death should be able to decide whether or not euthanasia is justifiable for them, but only when they are in the correct state of mind. Those who chose willingly can either be suffering from depression or from that of sickness and that sickness can impair the way they think by forcing an unbearable pain upon them. Under Self-Determination one must first mentally defeat the sickness and then when they are in the correct state of mind then they should be able to make any judgmental decision and it is likely under this case that they would choose life over death. [10]


Another anti-Euthanasia advocate is Jeremy Bethem who is quoted saying, " “it is the
greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and
wrong.” [11]

This means that we must observe the weight of the individual's value to the comunity verse the needs of that individual. Though the individual may be in pain they are still in the wrong state of mind as I brought up earlier meaning that the person cannot properly think for themselves and have lost the ability to choose between right and wrong as they are attempting to end their lives with no reguards to others. They belong to the collective comunity and because of that the value of them is together a great impact. For this we are reminded of the allusion of For Whom the Bell tolls meaning that we as a society are joined together as one and it's because of that one person missing from society the entire society will feel the loss in everything from emotionally to the person's productivity that the contribute to better the community would vanish and that one person's death and their suicide would harm the entire community. So it maters not the level of pain the person is expierencing as if they kill themselves they would be robbing the community and it in turn harms society.

Due to me running out of characters my sources will be presentedi n the comments section.

Debate Round No. 2
eheinrichs19

Pro

eheinrichs19 forfeited this round.
lannan13

Con

All points extended.
Debate Round No. 3
eheinrichs19

Pro

I forfeit. YEAH.
lannan13

Con

All points extended.

Please vote Con.
Debate Round No. 4
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by eheinrichs19 2 years ago
eheinrichs19
Hey, I'm done. I need to finish my work.
Posted by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
Round 2 Sources
1. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...)
2. ( Smets T, Bilsen J, Cohen J, Rurup ML, De Keyser E, Deliens L. The medical practice of euthanasia in Belgium and the Netherlands: legal notification, control and evaluation procedures. Health Policy.2009;90:181"7. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2008.10.003.) )
3. (Medical end-of-life practices under the euthanasia law in Belgium. Bilsen J, Cohen J, Chambaere K, Pousset G, Onwuteaka-Philipsen BD, Mortier F, Deliens L N Engl J Med. 2009 Sep 10; 361(11):1119-21)
4. (The medical practice of euthanasia in Belgium and The Netherlands: legal notification, control and evaluation procedures. Smets T, Bilsen J, Cohen J, Rurup ML, De Keyser E, Deliens L Health Policy. 2009 May; 90(2-3):181-7)
5. (http://www.all.org...)
6. (http://www.all.org...)
7. (To Die, to Sleep: US Physicians' Religious and Other Objections to Physician-Assisted Suicide, Terminal Sedation, and Withdrawal of Life Support" (Source: Farr A. Curlin, MD)
8. (http://euthanasia.procon.org...)
9. (http://www.nysrighttolife.org...)
10. (http://www.vatican.va...)
11. ( http://www.bmj.com...)
Posted by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
Okay, I'll get this debate moving after school. Are you okay if I site Fox for something?
Posted by eheinrichs19 2 years ago
eheinrichs19
Nah man I don't mind.
Posted by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
Would you be okay if I put sources in the comments section or do you want it in the round?
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by chrisjachimiak 2 years ago
chrisjachimiak
eheinrichs19lannan13Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Con had better arguments and sources, as well as grammar. Conduct was was also con.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 2 years ago
16kadams
eheinrichs19lannan13Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by bsh1 2 years ago
bsh1
eheinrichs19lannan13Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession.