And On That Note..

Death is not a topic of interest for most. It is a topic that people often dance around as it can be emotionally taxing and overall just a scary concept to wrap our heads around. But the truth is, we need to talk about it. Many people can recall a loved one, a friend, or someone they know that had been diagnosed with a terminally ill sickness. That is one of the main reasons we collectively decided on this topic as each of us had a na_scotus_1005_bw_3a_t440personal connection to someone in our lives who had battled such a similar situation. The goal is the blog was to think about death in the logical way, by proving exactly why people should have the right to dictate there own lives through euthanasia. Though a few states have successfully legalized euthanasia and many are on a righteous path in doing so, the is still a lot of work to be done in order to prove the necessity of this concept throughout our society.

Throughout the weeks, we have refuted arguments agains euthanasia. For example, opposing advocates have stated that euthanasia may give doctors too much power, could lead to irreversible changes to society, violate religious practices, could hinder the patient’s recovery, or give people a chance to abuse this privilege for an easy way out. Yet, we have proven all of these notions to be completely wrong, through not only credible sources and researchers but also real life cases.

For one, euthanasia does not give doctors too much power as patients have complete control and say in the whatever they decide to do. In reality, the whole point of euthanasia is to give the PATIENT the power to make their own decisions. Though people may have opposing religious views but as proven through the constitution, religion is not seen as invalid through physician_assisted_suicidethe our rights. Further, it does not hinder the patient’s recovery as the majority of these patients are terminally ill or suffering from an illness that will leave them in misery for the rest of their lives.

The main argument,however, is rather simple, its my body so why is someone telling me what to do with it? When we are born, we are given rights and given the opportunity to make our own decisions, so why should our choice to die be any different? This argument can be exemplified with the innumerable cases of terminally patients, including famous figures like Brittany Maynard. [Check out our post about her here!) She, and many others, show exactly why euthanasia should be legal as they would rather die then endure the pain and suffering they would by living. Also, euthanasia is widely practice illegally, therefore, it legalization will only help dismiss the difficult and unnecessary use of the judicial and prison system. Lastly, we exemplified the benefits of euthanasia economically as it will dramatically cut screen_shot_2016-02-09_at_4-21-10_pmmedicare costs along with giving the patients what they deserve.

All of these arguments serve the exemplify the necessity of euthanasia in American society. It’s success among other countries is extremely prevalent and should serve as a model to the United States. Our group will continue to spread awareness of this topic but for now we are signing off! Thank you for reading and if would like to get involved and help get the word out, click the links below!

I’m not afraid of being dead. I’m just afraid of what you might have to go through to get there.” –Pamela Bone

The Conversation Project!

Compassion and Choices


To Pass Peacefully

Those who are against the legalization of euthanasia have an incredibly naive mindset about just how painful it can be to suffer through life. There are countless anti-euthanasia arguments, but one of the most profound is the religious argument saying that life is the greatesteuthanasiachn gift and only God has the authority to end it. The general Christian view is that even if a person wants to die, God created all life processes including life and death so we should not interfere with them. Additionally, many churches believe that the dying process itself is valuable and the moments right before death have great importance, so we should not end life prematurely.

The religious argument against euthanasia is very similar to religious arguments against abortion. The United States of America was a country founded on religious freedom, so why should one religion dictate everyone’s life choices? Not everyone practices Christianity, so not everyone should have to follow the rules of the Bible. The U.S. Constitution clearly states in The First Amendment, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” Essentially, using religion as a reason not to practice euthanasia is unconstitutional and therefore, invalid.

Another argument against euthanasia is that sometimes, terminally ill patients can get better. These people feel that medical mysteries can happen anytime and euthanasia is a quick and unnecessary getaway.

The reality is, euthanasia is used as a very last resort for people who are suffering so badly that they have no choice. Ending your own life is not something taken lightly, and it is usually a decision made after months and years of thought. Yes, it is true that on very rare occasions, terminally ill patients can recover, but this has as much of a chance of happening as you winning the lottery or getting struck by lightning. Thed1409eu0b odds are not promising, and the suffering of such illnesses is so great that patients don’t want to take their chances. If suffering patients don’t have access to physician-assisted suicide, they will take matters into their own hands and end up suffering even more while trying to end the original suffering. For example, Tony Nicklison was denied the chance to die and end his “locked in syndrome” of not being able to move a single muscle in his body. Unable to do anything else, he ended up starving himself to death after about a week. Instead of peacefully dying around their loved ones, patients are being forced to commit suicide that is even more painful.

Should prisoners get equal rights?

As discussed, California is one of the few states in America to have legalized euthanasia. Originally, their Death with Dignity Act applied to all terminally ill patients who met the given requirements. In recent news however, prisoners are no longer given this right, no matter how sick they are. There has been much controversy around this new policy. What do you think? Do you believe all citizens should be given this equal right? Click the link above for more information!


The Price of Life

Death is an extremely sensitive, depressing, and emotionally challenging subject to tackle but as an outsider looking in, the economical arguments are essential to discussion in order to show the true benefits of euthanasia. Ultimately, patients who are terminally ill often feel that they become a financial burden on their loved ones as they stated that next to pain and suffering this is the second most important reason people wish to partake in euthanasia. I am no math expert but figuratively paying for lethal medication versus years and years of medicare is completely contrasting in the amount of money to spend.

According to, provides four essential economic benefits of euthanasia.

  1. Lessen hospital bills- as mentioned above, euthanasia can immensely cut costs with less time and care in the hospital.
  2. cost containment- low budget in the health care industry and thealthcre.jpghe present day economic situation will force many hospitals to make budget cuts, which will lead to less funding for hospital beds and nursing staff.
  3. Reduction in financial burden-In the current economic climate, the majority of families may not have sufficient financial means to get medical care, thus leading to drainage of their limited resources.
  4. Lastly, more focus on other patients- the medical care that is given to terminally ill patients can instead be redirected to patients with possible recovery.

This argument is even justified by a renowned economist, Robert Leeson. He is a published arobert-leeson-2010uthor in a number of the world’s leading journals and is ranked the world’s 17th top economist. He stated that more than a quarter of Medicare’s annual budget is spent on end-of-life care, ultimately draining societal resources for that which has little measurable benefit. “Moreover, in a society with limited resources, taxpayer money can be spent only once, and given the lack of tangible benefit that end-of-life care truly provides, resources ought instead to be allocated to more worthy cases, such as better infant mortality outcomes.” With these clear arguments, he proposes two educated proposal’s for the government.

  1. Leeson believes that “the government make a determination that a good portion of the medical care afforded to the ill or elderly is simply unworthy of funding. He is suggesting that the government should be in charge of deciding which lives have enough value to justify funding for care or comfort measures.”
  2. He also believes the government’s ultimate role is to help its citizens see that choosing death over life is the ration decision and that they need to provide incentives.

Ultimately, these findings all prove the importance in legalizing euthanasia not only for the terminally ill patient but also for economic and medicare purposes. Through a utilitarian perspective, with less money and resources spent on those impeding death through extensive painful treatments or prolonged hospital stays, we are ultimately taking away from those who are fighting and can achieve survival.

The economic benefits in coalition to allievating pain and doom those who are suffering exemplify the exact reason euthanasia and physicican assisted suicide must be legal. 

“The harsh reality that surrounds terminally ill individuals is that they are unable to contribute financially to society, and from an economic standpoint their presence is all cost and no benefit. In an unprecedented worldwide suffering economy, the continued existence of an individual suffering from a deteriorating quality of life puts incredible financial pressure on the public.”-Jayne Cooke

The Greek Root

column-exercises-e1347912878986.jpgFor any My Big Fat Greek Wedding watchers, you know that the root of everyone word is greek. Oddly enough, euthanasia comparatively has the same. The word euthanasia in greek is ευθανασία which directly translates to eu (good) and thanatosis (death) to ultimately mean good death or mercy killing. Ending someone’s life in a painless way. If the ancient greeks support our argument, why doesn’t everyone?

What’s the Difference?

A usual misconception: Physician-assisted suicide is NOT the same as euthanasia! 

Although both terms involve using lethal medications to deliberately end a terminally-ill patient’s life, the major differentiating factor is who exactly is administering the medication. In physician-assisted suicide, the patient themselves need to self-administer the medication but the patient ultimately decided when and if they will ingest it. On the other hand, with euthanasia, the physician plays a large, more active role in the process in carrying out the patients request. Now you know!


Snapchat News

If you were to ask any 15-22 year old which social media platform they use the most, it would undoubtedly be Snapchat. In the past few years, Snapchat has dominated the social media sphere and has become an essential outlet for advertisers and businesses to get their word out. Recently, they have added a new features called SnpachatNews, where magazines and companies provide daily articles and interactive pages for viewers to explore. img_9575Yesterday, in scrolling through Cosmopolitan, I came across an article called “Im Terminally Ill and I Want to Choose When I Die.” The article discussed the life of Jenny Cooper who was a women that had terminally ill breast cancer. Having this positive and influential story on snapchat is a huge advancement for legalizing euthanasia as it gives this important topic the coverage on a whole other level. Besides scholarly articles and news stations, the young generation is extremely uninformed of this important topic and having stories on these different social networks could be extremely helpful! Check out the link above for the full story!

The Medical Care That People Deserve

The populations who want to keep euthanasia illegal don’t truly understand the pain and suffering that these people are going to. It is hard to put yourself in these people’s shoes and to understand what it really feels like to view death as your one and only option to be happy. One argument that I keep stumbling upon is that people who turn towards euthanasia are confusing their desire to end pain and suffering with a desire to actually die. The argument is that they aren’t being treated fully for their pain and should resort any and all methods to reduce their pain to an amount that can be dealt with on a daily basis. To believe that people turning to euthanasia haven’t already exhausted all of their options is just stubborn. Euthanasia is one hundred and ten percent people’s last option. Choosing to end your own life due pain and suffering that is never ending is not something that people come upon lightly. Before looking to euthanasia as their only way out of the pain and misery they are feeling they do everything humanly possibly to end it using medicine. But, when the medicine to stop their pain fails they must turn to medicine for help in a different way.

Additionally, with this argument people believe that if euthanasia is legal then people will be less likely to seek medical help to end their pain and suffering and will just resort to euthanasia. This idea is extremely immature belief. People don’t turn to death without second-guessing it or giving it years of consideration. Specialized medical care for people with serious illness, also known as palliative care, will not be effected at all if euthanasia is legalized. This is because people with these illnesses will try every other method to ease their pain before resorting to euthanasia. For patients who turn to euthanasia there is absolutely nothing more they can try. They can no longer lie the life they are living because medicine keeps failing them time and time again. It is time that medicine gives people what they truly want and truly need.

Read more about this specific argument here.

Make America Great Again?

Although there is certainly some shock and discouragement in the new presidency results, a new president means new actions, a new mindset, and new laws. Donald Trump has not completely dived into his full opinion on euthanasia but in a brief statement, he was asked, Should terminally ill patients be allowed to end their lives via assisted suicide? His answer was: Yes, but only after a psychological examination to show they fully understand this choice.

This is amazing news for the future of legalizing euthanasia and we hope that this could also aid the prop106 in the efforts for justice of terminally ill patients.

Donald Trump

Let’s Be Honest Here…

Think about all the things people do on a daily basis that is illegal but done anyway. For example, speeding on the highway, we all rush sometimes, its illegal but its done by probably the majority of you all reading. An even better example is a more highly controversial topic, buying and smoking marijuana. It is legal in a few state but it is prevalent in almost every. Euthanasia can be seen as a similar situation as it is only legal in 5 of the 50 states, but even law abiding citizens such as doctors and patients commit illegal actions in order to do what is truly best in the given situation.

So the main argument here is very pragmatic in the sense that it is already such a widespread practice, thereforCriminal_1.jpge, in regulating it properly it will not only give justice to the terminally ill but more important it will stop inflicting the label of criminals upon them and their doctors. Often doctors believe that it is their duty to help their patients with whatever they want to do in order to respect their wishes and end their suffering. Often in order to avoid prosecution Doctors need to be extremely careful with their language and actual assistance with the patient. Often doctors will prescribe their terminally ill patients with narcotics, such as pain killers, which in turn allows them to choose to purposely overdose.

This uncomfortable middle-grown can be exemplified through a case of a husband and wife, Hope Arnold and J.D Falk. J.D was diagnosed with stomach cancer and was unable to find a doctor to help him and ultimately was discharged to gobffae311b.jpg home on hospice. Her wife ran into one of his doctors on the way out and he passed her a bottle of liquid morphine and said “you might need it.” Although he
did not take it and passed away a few days later naturally, the article mentions the point of intent. It states “People don’t talk about it, but it happens. Just over 3 percent of U.S. doctors said they have written a prescription for life-ending medication. Almost 5 percent of doctors reported giving a patient a lethal injection. Those practices are undercover. They are covert.” These actions are needed but should not need to be so heavily concealed.

The most important example of this argument, however, revolves around the famous figure of euthanasia, is Dr. Jack Kevorkian. He is a renowned medical pathologist, with the nickname Mr. Death, who had assisted in over 100 terminally ill patients in their death. He created the “Thanatron” which was made up of 3 bottles of fatal drugs. He 70771866_130766612337made headlines soon after as he assisted the suicide of Janet Adkins, through an attached IV out of his Volkswagen van. Kevorkian was prosecuted a total of four times in Michigan and was acquitted in three of the cases, he stated that “he wanted to be imprisoned in order to shed light on the hypocrisy and corruption of society.” He continued his practice and ultimately in 1999 he was sentenced to 25 years in prison. After serving 8 years, he was released for good behavior and upon his release he immediately began speaking out about assisted suicide. In June of 2011, Kevorkian died of heart failure, but his legacy most definitely lives on.

Through these examples, it is clear that regardless of its legality, euthanasia is still widely practiced amongst the doctors of all states in America. Instead of convicting these harmless doctors and patients, why not allow them make their own decisions in the public light instead of forcing them to partake in illegal activity for ultimate justice?