The Right to Euthanasia for the Terminally Ill Essay

The Right to Euthanasia for the Terminally Ill - Essay Example This position will be arguable from various points. To begin with, the right to life is one of the universal laws. This means that individuals possess the entitlement to live at all costs. However, this is a fundamental argument that does not address issues further than the same. It is arguable that the previous lives relied on fundamental laws in order to steer their vast lives. This helped compromise on a significant part of their lives. A possible example concerns with the concentration in trade that triggered creating laws on associations and trade. This is because the world was moving from the agricultural age to industrial one. This recognizes the fact that advancement of society requires legislations of new laws in order to accommodate the same (Forman & Scumann, 2008). In these laws, there was the recognition that there was more to life than just the same. This means that quality of life was more vital than survival. Individuals underwent substantial suppression in the event of satisfying the fundamental entitlement of life. Their cases of oppression became invalid to the respective governments as long as they had their life. This means that when quality of life ceases, it becomes rational to seek other ways (White, 2005). In the cases of individuals, who are under substantial pain and chronic illness, they deserve termination of lives. In most cases, individuals consent to their deaths. This refers to the concept of assisted death. In archaic sense, individuals’ rights were based on their relation to the societal sense. This means that society first received its entitlements before the individuals acquired the same. However, society has been known to be an abstract term that does not entail substantial information about the same. This led to the jeopardy of individuals’ life for the sake of society’s heritage (Dyck, 2005). The focus of the new strategy regarded a focus on individuals’ scenarios. This led to the elimination o f the idea that all individuals could hold the same rights. In turn, legal bodies enhanced laws for specific scenarios and individuals. In this case, even legal entities had their laws that could deviate from the main legal requirements of the country or governable units. In turn, individuals may consent to their own termination of life. In this case, one’s personal rights surpassed national laws that could jeopardize one’s own quality of life. It is vital to note that one’s won personal reasons would be valid because they would request for euthanasia. In fair legal scenarios, national laws would be invalid in guiding such scenarios because such individuals would not live with satisfaction. In addition, it is vital to consider the scenario and the rights of family members in case of relatives in case of relatives in indeterminable coma. In such cases, such family members share deep financial and psychological stress (Gorsuch, 2009). The patients do not face any psychological stress since they would be in numb states. The problem of such scenarios concerns the fact that medicine describes life as a simple life of breathing. It is notable that most patients, in indeterminable coma, never rise up to life again. In such situations, relatives bear financial burden that would rive them to debts. Most governments, who enforce the right to life, would not subsidize such fees. In addition, the families face psychological str