If I had terminal cancer, I had a few weeks to live, I was in tremendous amount of pain - if they just effectively wanted to turn off the switch and legalize that by legalizing euthanasia, I'd want that. -- John Key<\/p>\r\n
Americans tend to endorse the use of physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia when the question is abstract and hypothetical. -- Ezekiel Emanuel<\/p>\r\n
My ultimate aim is to make euthanasia a positive experience. -- Jack Kevorkian<\/p>\r\n
Of all the arguments against voluntary euthanasia, the most influential is the 'slippery slope': once we allow doctors to kill patients, we will not be able to limit the killing to those who want to die. -- Peter Singer<\/p>\r\n
Our first topic\u00a0in applied ethics is the topic of euthanasia (and\/or physician assisted suicide \u2013 these are not really the same thing, as we will be seeing shortly, although for convenience we will use the term \u201ceuthanasia\u201d to cover both). The topic of euthanasia is not only a topic debated often in the public arena, but a central topic in the branch of ethics known as bio-medical ethics. The reasons for the importance of this topic are pretty obvious \u2013 the debate about euthanasia arises from the dilemmas of aging and dying in a world in which medical technology often permits us to continue to live in spite of major medical problems brought on by aging, disease or misfortune. Modern medicine enables us to prolong life as never before, but in some cases prolongation of life ceases to be such an obviously good thing. So the question arises as to whether it is ethically permissible, in certain kinds of situations, to choose to die, to help others to die, or to even cause them to die.<\/p>\r\n
Assisted Death & the Value of Life: Crash Course Philosophy #45<\/a> - Trigger Warning <\/span>(9:54)<\/strong><\/p>\r\n[embed]https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=3IsloHmKvWA&list=PL8dPuuaLjXtNgK6MZucdYldNkMybYIHKR&rco=1[\/embed]\r\n\r\nIf you are experiencing issues viewing the video above, please use this link: https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=3IsloHmKvWA&list=PL8dPuuaLjXtNgK6MZucdYldNkMybYIHKR&rco=1<\/a>.\r\n The word \u201ceuthanasia\u201d\u00a0itself comes from two Greek words meaning literally \u201cgood\u201d (eu<\/em>) and \u201cdeath\u201d (thanatos<\/em>). Some of the questions that arise in connection with euthanasia have to do with this literal meaning:<\/p>\r\n\r\n The first three questions aside,\u00a0for now, it is perhaps the last of these questions that has led to modern controversies about euthanasia. Modern medicine has given doctors enormous power to prolong life through radical surgical procedures and life sustaining technology that can keep some people in desperate medical conditions alive indefinitely. Thus, medicine has had to confront a new dilemma: should doctors do whatever they possibly can to preserve life, in keeping with their traditional role, or should they accept moral limitations on this power to keep alive. Formerly doctors faced primarily technical limitations on what they could do, and so the chief moral responsibility they had was not to harm patients. But now that those limitations have been greatly reduced, they find themselves face to face with questions about the value of life \u2013 is it worthwhile to live whatever the cost in medical resources or individual suffering? Are there some lives that are no longer worth living, even though the technical means of extending them are available?<\/p>","rendered":" If I had terminal cancer, I had a few weeks to live, I was in tremendous amount of pain – if they just effectively wanted to turn off the switch and legalize that by legalizing euthanasia, I’d want that. — John Key<\/p>\n Americans tend to endorse the use of physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia when the question is abstract and hypothetical. — Ezekiel Emanuel<\/p>\n My ultimate aim is to make euthanasia a positive experience. — Jack Kevorkian<\/p>\n Of all the arguments against voluntary euthanasia, the most influential is the ‘slippery slope’: once we allow doctors to kill patients, we will not be able to limit the killing to those who want to die. — Peter Singer<\/p>\n Our first topic\u00a0in applied ethics is the topic of euthanasia (and\/or physician assisted suicide \u2013 these are not really the same thing, as we will be seeing shortly, although for convenience we will use the term \u201ceuthanasia\u201d to cover both). The topic of euthanasia is not only a topic debated often in the public arena, but a central topic in the branch of ethics known as bio-medical ethics. The reasons for the importance of this topic are pretty obvious \u2013 the debate about euthanasia arises from the dilemmas of aging and dying in a world in which medical technology often permits us to continue to live in spite of major medical problems brought on by aging, disease or misfortune. Modern medicine enables us to prolong life as never before, but in some cases prolongation of life ceases to be such an obviously good thing. So the question arises as to whether it is ethically permissible, in certain kinds of situations, to choose to die, to help others to die, or to even cause them to die.<\/p>\n\r\n \t