Euthanasia is clearly a problematic issues are cases are so individual and different that you could even base an opinion on the subjecting around every single case needing special consideration, akin almost to a trial, to determine whether it is acceptable. It is where the two coincide that will give the best social outcome. I look at the issue from a utilitarian viewpoint that aims to achieve maximum 'utility'.
I think the key considerations should be
social consensus and
morality.A
social consensus is required in order for any law regarding the subject to be obeyed. Therefore it is, in my opinion, what is socially acceptable on the issue that should ultimately be the law. If there is enough pro euthanasia opinion circulating, then there should be a referendum.
Secondly, from a
moral point of view it is, in my opinion, to forcibly prolong life through the use of modern medical techniques when doing so causes undue or unnecessary pain, particularly when the person would have passed away without the use of such medicine. Obviously I do not disagree with modern medicine per sé but when it is being used solely to prolong life that would otherwise end, especially when causing pain, then is obviously a clear case for euthanasia.
Any euthanasia law would be problematic to implement and police, firstly we would need to be
extremely careful in defining the criteria by which a person can qualify for euthanasia. There are serious issues regarding the need for screening the mental health of anyone considered for euthanasia to ensure any decision was not made
non compos mentis (not of sound mind).
Comment/Reply (w/o sign-up)
