Euthanasia refers to the practice of intentionally ending a life to relive the pain and suffering of that person. The more commonly used phrase for euthanasia is "mercy killing". What an intriguing combination of words! Mercy indicating a positive attribute of humanity. While killing, is to end a life, which many of us count as a negative attribute. Together when these words come, the nature of the thoughts that they provoke, though seems balanced, isn't. In this article I will be expressing my personal views about mercy killing. Let's know a little more about it first:
Mercy killing is classified into three categories-
Voluntary- with the consent of the patient. This is legal in some countries only. 'Assisted suicude' is legal only in Switzerland and the US states of California, Oregon, Washington, Montana and Vermont.
Non voluntary- when the consent of the patient is 'unavailable'. This is illegal world wide but decriminalized in specific conditions in the Netherlands under the Groningen protocol.
Involuntary- This is conducted against the patient's will.
These are furthermore classified as into Passive ( when the medication required to keep the patient alive is stopped) and Active (which involves use of lethal substances or forces, injections, excess dosage of some pills)
Even after all this classification, there is one thing that pops up in our mind-
Mercy killing; a person's life is taken away intentionally, so that the person does not have to suffer any more pain. The thought of mercy killing comes when there is no hope of recovery of the patient who is suffering. Some of us will think that mercy killing is fair because not only is the person suffering relieved off the pain but also, his/her family passing through emotional,financial, etc burden is relieved. There is no wrong in taking away the life because it is for a good cause. Mercy killing in short puts an end to a number of burdens, strains and pain. Yet after all these fair points why is it completely illegal in so many countries?
This according to me is mainly due to two reasons. First being religious views second being that making it legal would put the Society on a slippery slope. Let's address the second point first.
All kinds of mercy killing would make certain activities which should be illegal, legal. For example: a family member upon whose death a large sum of money or a large deal of property will be given to person xyz. In case the family member falls sick but his/her medical issue can be cured and he/she has hopes of living longer, the medical team could be bribed by the person xyz to perform mercy killing and giving the opposite of living hopes to the family member. This is a pure hypothetical situation which is not aimed at demeaning any medical professional. Also according to Sadhguru, a medical team's responsibility is to work for a person to live not to end the living. This could sadly be a case if mercy killing got legalised. The next point is the religious, philosophical views of men. Several religions deny the act of mercy killing and assisted suicide as it would be disrespecting the creation of God. While some religions agree to passive mercy killing under some situations. I largely believe that mercy killing is better kept illegal. My belief, my teachings tell me that what is not given cannot be taken away. Even in a dark room a single ray of hope can shine bright. A life no matter how hopeless it might be to continue without pain, should not be taken away. Destiny of a man is written by himself and God adds and subtracts things from it, therefore, even if people say that practicing optimism on this level is stupidity, they will never know what was destined by the person and God. At the end the conclusion comes to that one statement- what is not given cannot be taken away.
Well written, very good