Abstract This paper deliberates the ethics behind euthanasia of terminally ill patients

Abstract
This paper deliberates the ethics behind euthanasia of terminally ill patients. I argue for euthanasia by addressing counterarguments regarding weakening the responsibility of doctors to save lives, the holiness of life, and the patient’s best interest. I discuss these counterarguments, and continue to explain why they are not complete in order to fully convince one person that euthanasia is never morally permissible. I conclude this paper by making clear that euthanasia should not only be legal, but is morally permissible for terminally ill patients who have exhausted all other plausible treatment options.

The Morality Behind Euthanasia of Terminally Ill
Patients and Its Legalization
Webster’s dictionary defines euthanasia as, “the act or practice of killing or permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured individuals in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy”. The definition of euthanasia put in plain words how much release it carries to those who choose to involve themselves in it. It provides relief for them. The issue of whether we should forbid euthanasia has been widely debated in our community recently. In fact, this practice is illegal in many countries. It is also an important issue because it is highly provocative and is becoming an increasingly hot topic almost all over the world. It has a purpose, and it should be valued as satisfying an emptiness created by our occasionally inhumane modern society. For this reason, many different arguments have been put forward about this issue. Many people think that it is not right to kill a person even if they are terminally ill because this person need a chance to live along and see his life, but I will argue that in some situations, when all other options have been used, euthanasia is in fact morally permissible. I will discuss several points to demonstrate my controversial position. These points will include counterarguments such as that euthanasia may weaken the responsibility of doctors to save lives, the argument for holiness of life, and that it may not be in the best interest of the patient.
Weakening the Responsibility of Doctors to Save Lives
Persons who are opposed to the fundamental idea of euthanasia and supported suicide may claim that this practice weakens the responsibility and commitment of doctors and nurses to protect lives. Making euthanasia accessible to all patients, no matter what their conditions are, may lead to overuse which would turn out to be a problem. Patients who could be healed may not want to make the effort to be treated. Therefore, they, immediately following their diagnosis, choose euthanasia as the best solution to get rid of their diseases.