DEATH AS MEDICINE?

“Death is a punishment for some, for others a gift, and for many a favor"-Seneca. Euthanasia
is a very controversial case to discuss and there are different arguments for or against it. In
this essay, I am going to talk about the pros and cons. Then, I will finish with my personal
opinion and the reasons for my position.

We know it is very controversial when we affirm the dead is better than the medicine. But to
begin is necessary to define what is the life of person. According to Paula Siverino, it is not
equal to biological life, the definition of life of person is the axis of human rights, due to the
fact, the right to life should not be understood as having the right to simple existence, the life
is more than that. I mean, the life of person has to be of quality and every basic aspect of it
must be satisfied since the life stars until it ends. Besides, every necessity matter whether it is
a basic need or one of those that can wait.

Well, if we talk a about quality life, we refer the person who has to live quietly and happily.
Then, if we have an incurable illness that has long and painful treatment, would we live
quietly and happily?

Those who are in favor of euthanasia argue on the basis of human rights. The third article of
Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognizes the right to life, liberty and security of
person. The first right has double interpretation. The first means, the life implies hat nobody
could be killed arbitrarily. The second one, but not less important, it´s the person can be fully
developed and realized; also, during development, all needs must be met. In this sense, we
understand that throughout the development of life there must be peace and fullness, so that
the person can do what he wants.

Following, the liberty implies the person has autonomy to can do what he or she wants. The
State shouldn´t intervene to prevent what the person wants to do mine while that action doesn
´t contradict public order; on the contrary, it must act when the person is prevented from
doing what they want or forced to do something they do not want.

Consequently, those who are at a point where their physical and mental state does not find
peace or relief from the illness they suffer because treatment to postpone life is extremely
painful, there is not quality life. Therefore, the person can request the suspension of the
practice of the treatment, or the administration of the medication to end the pain. To prevail
their right to freedom and to die how they wish and in dignified conditions, without pain or
suffering.

On the other hand, those who are against think that when a person has autonomy and the
capacity to request euthanasia. However, people have different levels of autonomy, which
means that each person has a different rational capacity to make decisions and act with self-
determination. So, when our level of autonomy is not enough to think rationally, it is
necessary to be represented by someone else who does not make the decision for the patient,
but someone who makes decisions for him. And in this case, the patient cannot make
decisions for himself due to the disease he suffers and cannot be 100% conscious, that is, he
cannot fully discern, so it is necessary for another person to watch over his well-being, but not
because of his death.

Having clarified the arguments of both positions, I want to explain my opinion.

Personally, I think that euthanasia should be legalized and regulated completely. In Perú, we
have the first case of an approved request of euthanasia

I am in favor of euthanasia because when you cannot find full moments of peace and
tranquility due to a disease that is not curable or that its treatment is extremely painful and
develops in a permanent process that prevents the free development of the personality, you
should choose with total freedom, if you want to stop the treatment or request the application
of the injection to die in dignified conditions. This act could not be considered homicide
because it is not an arbitrary decision of the doctor or another family member because the
patient has requested the practice of euthanasia by his will and with full capacity to decide for
himself, for his health and the lack of quality of life. This decision could affect the family, but
they would receive psychological assistance to face that the disease had no cure and the
process was very painful for the patient, who finally made that decision. The State would be
in charge of this entire process because it is he who must be the guarantor of the right to a
dignified life, and therefore, to death in dignified conditions.

Student: Estrada Villarreal, Sofía Inés María del Pilar