Euthanasia
...dical practitioner to assist the patient to terminatethe patients life.” However, this law was soon made ineffective by an amendment by the Commonwealth government to the Northern Territory Act 1978. This legisaltion sated that, “…the enactment of the Legislative Assembly called the Rights of the Terminally Ill Act 1995 has no force or effect as law of the territory.” Three people had already been legally euthanised, however, before the Commonwealth government made this amendment. (Wikipedia, 2004). Euthanasia is currently a criminal offence throughout Australia, however death with dignity is legal to some degree. For example, in South Australia, under the Consent to Medical Treatment Act 1988, A person of or over 18 years of age may, while of sound mind, give a direction about the medical treatment that the person wants or doesn’t want. This legislation is similar to that of all the other states. The Netherlands are one of the few countries that have legalised Euthanasia. However, they require that the physician “has terminated a life or assisted suicide with due care." This requirement that the procedure be carried out in a medically appropriate fashion transforms the crimes of euthanasia and assisted suicide into medical treatments. Teenagers 16 to 18 years old may request and receive euthanasia or assisted suicide. A parent or guardian must "have been involved in decision process," but need not agree or approve. Children 12 to 16 years old may request and receive euthanasia or assisted suicide. A parent or guardian must "agree with the termination of life or the assisted suicide.” A person may qualify for euthanasia or assisted suicide if the doctor "holds the conviction that the patient's suffering is lasting and unbearable." There is no requirement that the suffering be physical or that the patient be terminally ill. (International Task Force, 2002). Strengths in legislation Many religious people, primarily Christians, object that it is not loving to kill someone, and that medication today is at a standard wheresuffering is preventable. Many religions also regard life as being derived from God and thereefore that either it is God’s life that is being taken, or that destroying it is an offense to Him. Furthermore, in most Western nations the prohibition on killing is considered a moral absolute that cannot be conditioned by ethical concerns. The second type of argument against euthanasia is that one day we may find ouselves in a position where we are suffering, and it may think it better if the doctors on whom we depend are not tempted to perform euthanasia. If euthanasia were to be allowed, it is feared by some, doctors might press people into euthanasia to reduce medical costs, or because their family wants them to die. Additionally, however, doctors themselves often argue against euthanasia, as providing death is opposite to their primary function and training. If, some have argued, a doctor is trained both to cure and kill, then he or she is being told always to judge when to kill and his or her best efforts at saving life will not be expended. (Lane, 2001). Of course there are also dangers and unavoidable issues regardign active Euthanaisa, these include the fact that; it is the deliberate taking of a human life, it is hard to prove without a doubt that consent is voluntary and there is always the possibility of mistaken diagnosis, a new cure, or spontaneous remission. It is because of these arguments and the conservative law makers, that no reforms have been made. The current laws do keep the people who argue this point happy, however statistics show that there is a rising majority of people in support of Euthanasia. Weaknesses in legislation Proponents of euthanasia argue that only patients can determine when suffering makes life worse than death and that such persons can and should be allowed to make the decision. Some also argue that terminally ill patients are respected more by having their suffering end than by being kept alive against their will. Additionally, a useful argument can be made about the harms to the whole of maintaining the individual beyond viability. The fact is, that; iindividuals have the right to decide about their own lives and deaths, denying terminally ill patients the right to die with dignity is unfair and cruel, the golden rule requires that we allow active euthanasia for terminally ill patients who request it in certain situations, people have the right to die with dignity. However there is no stronger argument for Euthanasia than by the words of people faced with a painful and terminal illness. These two letters emphasis the human dimension to the current legislation. Gayle Stelter writes; "For almost seven years I have been living with cancer, mostly joyously and gratefully, but gradually seeing the disease encroaching relentlessly on my once healthy body. Throughout these years, I have thought long and hard about death and I've discovered that it's not the prospect of death itself that is so frightening, but the process of dying. So to give myself courage, I have held an option in reserve. When I can see no quality ahead, when I am capable of b...