If a Country Calls Itself Free, Then The People Should be Free

People should have freedom over their lives, whether it be for what job they want to when and where they want to die. That is what my article is about, it debates about people wanting to choose to die and if it should be legal. But the main reasons people don't want to allow it are because of interference with religion, other loved ones may be effected, and mainly because it is illegal for a doctor to do so. Certain ways for people to die are illegal for a variety of reasons, some make more sense than others, but in the it should all come down to the patients choice.

I think that the patient should be able to end his/her life peacefully instead of living their life as a brain-dead vegetable. But certain religions believe that god should decide when a person dies and that is is wrong to deny gods will, but I believe that religious beliefs should not be mixed up with laws or the government. If you look at general history countries that have managed to keep a separation between religion and polotics, those countries are generally more successful. But even in countries where those two institutions of society are separate, you may not end someone life in a peaceful way even if the patient wants to. In my opinion doing this is an injustice to people, but yet it is part of the justice system.

The laws about different types of euthanasia are different wherever you go, for example in Washington it is legal to perform assisted suicide or active euthanasia, in which you give a drug or lethal injection with the patient's permission. Whenever I imagine assisted suicide I picture someone on the top of a building, their life is not worth living, due to pain, or any other reason someone else is there to give them a nudge, just a little push off the ledge, do I think this is wrong? It depends; the person may be misjudging things, and they have a chance of being saved then it may be wrong. If their life is truly not worth living and they just don't have the courage or willpower to take that step themselves it just might be right. This may make things sound dark, but certain diseases will cause tremendous amounts suffering, and the treatment could as well, and from my view I could consider it inhumane to force someone to live through torture like that. Many people still edge away from the topic of assisted suicide, so they use a different method, that ends with the same final product.

In Texas, assisted suicide is illegal, but passive euthanasia is legal. Passive euthanasia is when the doctors stop treatment on a patient whether due to it being futile, or perhaps the they can not afford the treatment, the permission may come from another loved one, a will, or the patient states it themselves. Another similar term for passive euthanasia that is much less official would be "Do Not Resuscitate"which means, if the participant has a heart attack or chokes, you may not give CPR or the Heimlich, you must let the patient die. This may sound harsh and irrational, but if it is what they want, it is best that you don't interfere. Many other types of euthanasia are around, a few legal only under certain circumstances, and others with varying degrees of consequences, such as involuntary euthanasia in which the doctor gives lethal drugs or an injection without the patient's consent.

Many different enthusiasms are legal or illegal in countries worldwide. They could be legal for reasons about religion, ethics, or maybe the doctor doesn't have the willpower to end someone life. People who believe in different things can view these topic however they want, but in the end they will all end the same, the patient will eventually pass away, and it could be due to old age, active euthanasia/assisted suicide or the disease takes them. No matter which I believe the final decision should always be from the individual who is suffering.