k so i have this essay im doing for monday and this is what i have so far, but i need suggestions on how to make it better,i read it to myself twice and it sort of seems like im rambling on about different things..

There is a lot of heated debate today, among the public the politicians,

and philosophers about euthanasia. While the government is hesitant to

venture into morals and ethics, it appears that euthanasia is gaining more and more

media attention, in light of the Sue Rodriguez and Robert Latimer cases.

Of course, the issue is a difficult one to solve, and despite few advances,

The government has enacted penalties in the Criminal Code to punish assisted

suicide. Without holding back the government made euthanasia illegal in Canada,

Therefore all forms of it are now illegal. A large number of people turn to doctor-assisted

suicide. People who are pro-euthanasia are seen as selfish and taking the easy way out

disrespecting God and life in a way. Of course pro-euthanasia groups see themselves as

unselfish, doing it to make the person happy, for family support and of course a persons’

individual rights. Euthanasia is seen as an act of compassion to stop the ones you love

from suffering and pain.

The word euthanasia itself means ‘good death’ but now has a different meaning being to

cause death on purpose, either by doing something(commission) or by omitting

something(omission). The substitution of mild expressions of the pro-euthanasia

movements include “ the right to die”, and “death with dignity”. The term passive

euthanasia includes starvation or de-hydration, or any life-preserving procedures.

It refers to useless procedure in which only gives the person a longer time to live.

This needs to be distinguished from taking away something that is only keeping

The person alive,the taking away of which actually causes their deaths.No

Doctor pertaining to the principles of morality would put pressure on a

Patient or their family if they refused to go through with the procedure.

Doctors must take the action of discontinuing curative or therapeutic efforts when they

see that death is leaning forward and unable to be avoided. Patients may ask for all the

treatments they can possibly get if they desire but it’s not a sure thing that their life

will be lengthened as much as possible without encouraging the “right to die” movement.

Allowing death to occur when the patient simply refuses further treatments is

acknowledging their natural limit of independence or freedom. Of course this doesn’t

mean taking away their comfort and basic care. In 1991, the BC Royal Commission

made a conclusion that "the person who is dying should have the right to determine

the form and time of death…There is a right to commit suicide, and a physician should

be allowed to help a person who chooses to exercise that right.”

The Right to Die Society based in Victoria, British Columbia,

“States the right of any mature person who is constantly or terminally ill to choose the

time, place and intentions of his or her death.

Suicide and euthanasia are a good answer to refusing the quality of life which many

People go through as they age or what they undergo as a result from an accident or do to

A condition present at birth whether inherited or caused by environment.”

The form of euthanasia that gets the most debate is voluntary active euthanasia (VAE)

especially physician assisted suicide although many philosophers would agree that

people have the right to choose whether or not to go through with euthanasia, there is also

many philosophers that believe it goes against life and God himself. David Hume

was one of the many philosophers to argue that it isn’t wrong ,he argued vigorously that

“One has the right to end one's life when he or she pleases.” Jeremy Bentham English

Utilitarian philosopher made a good point that what we should do is look at how our

Actions, laws and social policies will affect people (and other animals, too) He said,

“Will they result in people being made happier, in living better lives? Or will they result

In people being made more miserable?” According to Bentham we should make

decisions on that basis, and only that basis. The associations to euthanasia were easily

seen. For utilitarian philosophers the question was simply “Does it increase or decrease

in human happiness to provide a quick, painless death for those who are dying in agony?”

They reasoned that the only consequence of such actions would be to decrease the

Amount of misery in the world; therefore euthanasia must be morally correct.

Another philosopher who went by the name of John Stuart Mill and also followed in the

Footsteps of Bentham argued that the person is in charge of their own body and mind;

Where no one else’s interests are needed, there is no other authority therefore if the

person wanted to die a quick and painless death, that’s up to them to decide and not

the government, Bentham himself asked for euthanasia in his last moments.

thats all i have for now lol so just tell me what you think