euthanasia should be legal in Canada
Debate Rounds (3)
I accept this debate. I shall be discussing Euthanasia as a whole, not just specifically Canada.
I quote from your argument "Euthanasia is one thing that we can do that will help patients." This is a very vague statement. You aren't being clear enough on what patients you are discussing but I shall assume fatally ill ones. Although, the very concept of Euthanasia has one fatal flaw. Almost all nurses, doctors and physicians within Canada and elsewhere give a "Hippocratic Oath" which they pledge to stand by at all times to always (I quote from the Hippocratic Oath) "Also I will, according to my ability and judgment, prescribe a regimen for the health of the sick; but I will utterly reject harm and mischief". In order for Euthanasia to be carried out, a doctor needs to end a patients life, which is in direct violation of their oath. The doctors need to preserve their oath (hence why doctors don't administer lethal injections in USA or carry out death penalty procedures) so they can't do it. Therefore, a different officer or other type of medical staff would need to carry this out but as they are not experienced the exercise may be flawed or may be carried out wrong, which may cause even more suffering to the patients. Regardless, if the oath was abolished or removed, the doctors would be morally wrong to end a patients life, since they are there to maintain all patients lives. It could also be easily abused by lack of regulations and accidents with Euthanasia before has happened in the Netherlands and Switzerland where the exercise has gone majorly wrong resulting in even more distress to the patient.
I quote from your argument "thanasia is also done with drugs which put the patient to sleep so they can die peacefully and painlessly which does not go against the harm part" This indeeds, does go against the Oath as they are harming a patient by ending its life, regardless if they died peacefully through the use of drugs or injections, the doctor/nurse still administered it so therefore they caused harm to the patient. I quote from your argument "And since you also bring up the accidents that happen then you should also know how many accidents don't happen" Regardless of how many safe procedures have been undertaken, there is still a chance and it has happened, accidents will and do happen, we can't just ignore the chances of it as you have done. I quote from your argument "To quote the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms "Everyone has the right not to be subjected to any cruel and unusual treatment or punishment." Keeping a patient alive in such terrible pain would go against the charter." Keeping someone alive, isn't "cruel or unusual treatment" because they are keeping a patient alive, I'm afraid, people do suffer pain, but this is very wide, as patients with a number of different diseases do suffer pain but get better (in other words, not fatally ill people), that doesn't mean we need to end their suffering. So, keeping terimnally ill people alive for as long as possible, isn't "cruel", it is simply trying to extend their lives, as this is what you try to do primarily with people who have terminally ill diseases/problems.
We shouldn't be comparing the lives of humans to animals. If it was just as simple as what you say it is, we would have already enacted it. The whole reasons some countries prohibit it is it up to abuse and can be easily abused. Another line from the Hippocratic Oath is "I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody if asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect", this clearly goes against physicians, nurses and doctors oath and would prevent them from carrying out Euthanasia procedures. Euthanasia also devalues the human life and makes it seem 'okay' to end someones life, in pain or not. There is also points in when we legalise Euthanasia, people will call for more regulations for involunatary Euthanasia for much smaller or less harmful diseases and illnesses known as the "Slippery Slope". In conclusion, it shouldn't be legalised as it devalues human life, goes against God and other religions and can be used illegally and other regulations need to be enacted making things very complex and overall, a waste of money.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.