Euthanasia,+when+is+it+permissible?+Rough+Draft

Euthanasia, when is it permissible? Eun Jie Lee Escuela Internacional Sampedrana

Whether or not euthanasia is the right thing to do or not have been raising questions throughout history. (I like how you start your essay.) Euthanasia is defined as the “intentional killing by act or omission of a dependent human being for his/her alleged benefit”. (Euthanasia.com, 2010) Euthanasia is classified into four types: voluntary, involuntary, passive and active. Voluntary euthanasia is when the patient requests that action be taken to end his/her life, with a full knowledge that this will lead to his death. Involuntary euthanasia is when the patient's life is ended without the patient's knowledge and consent when he/she is too sick and weak to be aware of what is happening or to take any action on his own behalf. Passive euthanasia is usually withdrawing medical treatment with the deliberate intention of causing the patient’s death. Lastly, active euthanasia is taking specific steps to cause patient’s death, such as injecting poison, overdose of painkillers or sleeping pills. So when is euthanasia permissible? Euthanasia is permissible __only and only if__, ( IF and only if) the patient himself/herself told beforehand that they do not wish to be resuscitated (rephrasing), or in other words, only voluntary euthanasia is permissible, whether it is passive or active. (perhaps, you could use more citations when describing the types of euthanasia) **[I concur there should be a revision of some of the senteces because they can be rephrased to sound better and more grammatically correct]** ** (site your sources) **
 * Euthanasia, when is it permissible?**

John Blend ​(who is blend?) has lain in persistent vegetative state for three years. There is no hope for improvement and his family is tired and hopeless. Should Blend’s life be ended by an assisted suicide, or euthanasia? (this kind of example/question should probably go at the beginning of the entire essay, agree with sheila, ** agree, yes you could start of your introductory paragraph with this example, it would be more eye-catching ** ) The answer is no, unless John Blend has signed the DNR (“Do Not Resuscitate”) (author?) document earlier in his life. “A DNR order on a patient's file means that a doctor is not required to resuscitate a patient if their heart stops and is designed to prevent unnecessary suffering”. (Anonymous, 2000)** (try to find more info. on this source) **Only the patient __himself/herself__** (I believe you should eliminate this) **has the right for their own body. (I'm kind of lost?) How can the patient’s family or guardian make sure if the patient truly wants to die or not? (this transition is too quick, try answering the question first and then talk about how every human has his/her choice) No human can be forced to give up his/her body autonomy. The Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaimed by the United Nations’ General Assembly declares that "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person”. (UN General Assembly, 1948) As the right to life, no one but the patient could choose to live or not. Thus the patient’s family, guardian and even the doctors should assist the patient with the best attention rather than choosing to intentionally kill him/her simply because there is no hope on recovering. (maybe place this paragraph before the first one, as an intro to the intro) (unite this paragraph with the first one..?) Involuntary euthanasia is not permissible because it is a technical murder and abuse. Murder is the cold-blood termination of another’s life or “the crime of intentionally killing somebody”. (Compact Oxford English Dictionary, 2006) Involuntary euthanasia consists of ending a patient's life without the patient's knowledge and consent. The patient is unable to communicate because __he/she is too sick and weak to be aware of what’s happening__ .(choice of words ) (I think it's fine.) (** really think about this, is it murder even though the person is suffering? What about proxy consent? What if the patient told somebody else, like a family member before they entered a comatose state, they wanted to be euthanized?) ** So despite the patient’s will, the ( his/her, omit 'the', agree ) life is terminated by the legal guardian’s decision. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights proclaimed by the United Nations’ General Assembly also declares that “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment” in the article 5. (UN General Assembly, 1948) How can we make sure if the patient is not screaming, kicking and begging for life?** (?By a witness?? rephrase) ** Any intentional killing is a murder; since involuntary euthanasia is not agreed by the patient’s will, it is an inhumane murder, abuse and torture. ( I like how you use many citations because this increases credibility.) ** (You say you are against proxy consent-but this falls under voluntary euthanasia, and you stated in your introductory paragraph that you believe voluntary euthanasia is permissible...contradictory) **

There is a slippery slope **[define this word because someone might not know it.]** argument concerning euthanasia: permitting any action to end a person’s life might lead to many more deaths. Doctors could accidentally choose involuntary euthanasia by mistake, when in reality the patient could be cured further ahead. Or in worst cases, physicians could end up encouraging medical homicides, just like the famous Dr. Death, Jack Kevorkian. He “photographed the eyes of dying patients… he began to advertise his services as a physician offering 'death counseling'… Kevorkian helped over 130 people to die. Kevorkian believed that helping people was not enough, and actually killed Thomas Youk, filmed himself doing so and showed the film on 60 Minutes.”(Anonymous, 2008) Kevorkian was sentenced to ** (change 'to' to 'from') ** ten to twenty-five years in prison. ** (I believe you should specify the amount of years) ** Any other guardians, including family or doctors should not be given the right to decide the patient’s death, __since the guardian’s will could contain personal feelings taking in advantage of the slippery slope argument concerning euthanasia.__ (sounds awkward-->choice of words) ** (rephrase this sentence and check your grammar) **

Some people (what people?) argue that involuntary euthanasia is the right thing to do. These people argue that if the patient is terminally ill, he/she would not want to be brought back to pain. They also claim “when CPR is done, and done right the majority of the time ribs are bruised and broken. So not only with the terminal patient be in pain from whatever disease they have, they will have this pain on top of that”. (Tara Cellars, 2008) Well, who knows if miracle could exist and the patient will be cured afterwards? ** (Diction, avoid using a question, you've used to many, better use statements that sound confident in your position) ** We can’t just assume that the patient will be brought back to the same pain as before. The CPR pains? **(use a complete sentence, try fusing it with this next sentence instead of putting it in a separate one -->)** Doctors are trying to do their best, so the patients should bore the pain. Others (such as... who?) argue that it is okay to allow someone to die at the end of their life without hurting them. But when this “ending of life” is involuntary, how can we make sure that we are not hurting the patients? Only the patient himself/herself will know if the ending of his/her life is truly “helping them” or hurting them. Another raised argument is: isn’t voluntary euthanasia also a murder since it involves an intentional killing? Well voluntary euthanasia’s case is different. In a voluntary euthanasia, the patient signed a legal document that he/she does not want to be resuscitated in any circumstance. The patient is in accordance with his/her death, so it is not a murder since it was their own choice. Involuntary euthanasia is a technical murder, since it is not in consent with the patient’s will, so it must not be permitted. **[Good examples try not to leave unexplained like "others" try to always explain since it gives ethos to the essay]**

Euthanasia should be permissible only when it is voluntary because nobody but the patient himself/herself has the right to their own body. Any other people (person, omit 'people') do not have the right to kill or control the life of others. Thus, euthanasia should be legalized only for those cases when the patient has signed the DNR document prior in his/her life. ** (actually it is legalized that way, if you sign DNR, doctors can't do anything, they let you die)(need to expand on this conclusion) ** GOOD ESSAY, i know you still need to work on it, but it goes the right way. You just need to work on the stucture an order of the sentences. Follow the suggestions that say where tomove your sentences, they are great but need better structuring. Add to your conclusion, backing up what you've said in the entire essay. 1268698171SHEILA SIERRA I think that you have a very good essay, but it can be improved. For the beginning, I think you should fix the order of the paragraphs to organize your thoughts. Also, check the structure and order of your sentences, as well as your choice of words. Overall it's great and very interesting. I look forward on reading the final draft! good job! :) -Janelle Andonie

Your peers have added many good comments to help you improve your essay. Find some more solid, nameable sources to argue in favour and against your points. Try writing out some of your arguments in the form of a syllogism so that you can make them more clear and understandable. And you should look into more arguments against like some who would be in favour of involuntary euthanasia by passive means, for example, when a next of kin, who spoke to the patient about his or her intentions, and knows that the patient would not want to continue being hooked up to a machine to stay alive but did not sign a DNR order -- in a case like that is involuntary euthanasia permissible -- or would you still count that as voluntary because of the previous discussion with the next of kin? And what about the birth of infants with extreme deformities like those with spina bifida? As infants, they cannot give consent. Their death can be eminent depending on the severity of the condition, and if the parents consent and the doctors agree -- is this kind of euthanasia also wrong? But pay attention to the comments of your peers. They have made many good suggestions for you to improve you paper. You have a good start on it. 1268972765

**References** www.euthanasia.com Anonymous, 2000 http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/euthanasia/overview/dnr.shtml (UN General Assembly, 1948) http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ Murder (2006). Compact Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford. Retrieved March 10, 2010, from http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/evil?view=uk (Anonymous, 2008) http://www.rsrevision.com/Alevel/ethics/euthanasia/cases.htm (Tara Cellars, 2008) http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/551477/why_i_am_proeuthanasia.html?cat=9
 * Sources are... still not perfectly organaized because it is a rough draft ( :

​ 1268757945 Pablo C: I really like your way of analyzing the theme although you are having troubles with some of your citations. You should be careful when adding papers with no authors because it is very hard to rely on. You should also describe the importance of the person who you are referring to in order to have a slight idea of the ethos. Otherwise your supporting statements are quite relevant specially your counter argument which establishes the slipery slope. Eun Jie... you should also work on your citation, try looking at this webpage for more information Son of Citation. Chronic pain is way to bad to keep suffering....

Eun Young Jeon: ( I changed your color David Jeong because I had already commented on pink.) I liked your essay. This was a neat essay just that it had some minor mistakes. This essay clearly states all your ideas and doesn't change the idea that you begin with. Your essay has a very good structure and it's easy to understand.

Comments of David Jeong Having written about the same topic, it was really interesting to read a composition with similar views. I also agree that euthanasia must be performed only in certain conditions, this being the patient's agreement prior to the the accident or disease, and/or examinations to make sure there is no hope of recovery. Eunije's comment about pain on top of a pain in the last paragraph was really interesting. I haven't thought about any additional pain that a patient would receive besides the chronic pain.

**Comments By: Victor Garcia 1268791622

I think the essay is interesting. Most of the essays that i have read are really into the point. I think people are starting to learn what a position and philosophical essay really is. This essay only has minor issues with the essay are in relation with the lack of explanation in some of the statements. We have to remember that in order to guarantee credibility we have to avoid the " others" explanation when we can explain what those others are. Assuring these the reader will have no doubt on the ethos of the essay. The topic is really interesting because throughout the years it has been very controversial. With the correction of grammatical mistakes this can make an outstanding and convincing essay. Way to go Eun Jie, you can make it shine in the Final Draft.

The euthanasia issue is one that has been discussed a lot. It is interesting to read someone's opinion on this issue. You have some grammatical errors, try to read the essay out loud so you can identify them. Also, I noticed you use a lot of questions to get your point across. It's ok to use some, but try to avoid using them because it sounds as if you are unsure of what you are saying. If you are going to say something, as in a question, make sure its in a complete sentence, otherwise it sounds as if you are in a casual conversation with a peer. You need to expand more on your conclusion. Also, you have very good source citations, but you need to expand on them, with your own words support them to make your analysis and delivery more complete. Good job, keep it going. 1268800721 **