Though euthanasia still remains to be one of the most questionable topics around, the practice is nothing new and has pretty much been around since the start of civilization. Euthanasia or physician assisted suicide is used to put down patients who are in extreme pain or who are terminally ill .Its existences has been around as far back as the 5th century and was used by the Romans and Greeks. It wasn’t a controversial topic back then because no one questioned the value of human life. Yet through the years it caused uproar and many people opposed of the practice, especially the Jews and the Christians. Though now, not just religions play close attention to the usage of euthanasia, but now the whole population is focused on the topic as well. Today, many people despise euthanasia, but little do they know that it actually provides relief to a patient who is about to pass.  While it may seem that euthanasia is dangerous and is morally wrong to some, people should grasp that it’s a humane solution to put people out of their misery and should be the patient’s choice whether if it’s time for them to die or not.

In all honesty, the Hippocratic Oath has played a massive role in the argument of euthanasia. The Hippocratic Oath, which is sworn by physicians states, “do no harm” to a patient and to take care of a patient as well as they possibly can. The Hippocratic Oath is ridiculous though because it forces a suffering patient to stay alive! This pledge has gotten in the way of the legalization of euthanasia because people consider the treatment to do harm.  Such as when Leon Kass , a professor at the University of Chicago , thought euthanasia  violated the Hippocratic Oath when he stated, “ The prohibition against killing patients… Stands as the first promise of self-restraint sworn to in the Hippocratic Oath… In forswearing the giving of poison when asked for it, the Hippocratic physician rejects the view that the patient’s choice for death can make killing him right.” (Leon Kass, 1989)  Though when you actually think about it, to keep a patient alive is actually doing more harm when they could be at peace. Physicians would break the Hippocratic Oath because the doctor isn’t considering how much pain the patient is in and is dragging out the pain by keeping them alive. Additionally, the Hippocratic Oath doesn’t work for everyone’s needs, further explained in Euthanasia Sets Sail by saying, “ Over time the Hippocratic Oath has been modified on a number of occasions as some of its tenits became less and less acceptable … The much – quoted reference to “do no harm” is also in need of explanation. Does not doing harm mean that we should prolong a life that the patient sees as a painful burden? Surely the “harm” in this instance is done when we prolong the life, and “doing no harm” means that we should help the patient die.” (Euthanasia Sets Sail, 2007) Society shouldn’t really pay that much attention on the Hippocratic Oath though because it really is not a big deal. It’s not the law and is not that important. On Encylopedia.com, they state, “The Hippocratic oath is an anachronism. It is outdated and holds no power. There are no sanctions for those who violate its precepts, nor does it have a status in a court of law.” (Encyclopedia.com, 2003) Therefore, the Hippocratic Oath is just a promise to do what’s best as a doctor, and is not really important because as previously stated, it holds no power and is outdated.

Most importantly, the most asked question is how precious human life is. People question if it’s acceptable to end someone’s life with euthanasia. People’s opinions vary on the subject, but a Gallop poll discovered that 69% of people agreed that it’s okay for a doctor to end a patient’s life if they are terminally ill (Gallop Poll, 2006).  Though even if this poll showed that more than half of these people thought assisted suicide was good treatment, it still remains to be illegal in the United States. With little to no success in the legalization of euthanasia, it was stated by the Washington v. Glucksberg that, “The history of the law’s treatment of assisted suicide in this country has been and continues to be one of the rejection of nearly all efforts to permit it. That being the case, our decisions lead us to conclude that the asserted “right” to assistance in committing suicide is not a fundamental liberty interest protected by the Due Process Clause.” (Washington v. Glucksberg, 1997) The ill that don’t have access to the euthanasia treatment shouldn’t be ignored though. Just because U.S.A still views euthanasia as inhumane, that doesn’t mean we should give up trying to persuade them. It’s terrible how they don’t believe in giving a suffering person an escape from the pain. In Vacco v. Quill, it truthfully explains, “The right of a competent, terminally ill person to avoid excruciating pain and embrace a timely and dignified death bears the sanction of history and is implicit in the concept of ordered liberty. The exercise of this right is as central to the personal autonomy and bodily integrity…” (ACLU Amicus Brief in Vacco v. Quill, 1996) Some patients are suffering so much and will do anything to have the treatment, such as traveling to different countries to do so.

Consequently, in our country many patients in the hospital are forced to stay alive and to remain suffering since euthanasia is frowned upon. For example, if a cancer patient is suffering, 95% of the pain can be reduced, but only 5% can bring the pain down to a tolerable level (Nightingale Alliance.org).  If a patient is in that much pain, wouldn’t it make sense that euthanasia is the best option? If euthanasia isn’t allowed throughout our county, it could lead to unnecessary medical treatments that won’t work, and will let patients with an incurable disease live in pure torture, wishing they could be put to rest. Please, take a stand. You could help euthanasia become legal by speaking through word of mouth, or as going as big as writing a letter to your state governor.
 

Sources
"Gallup Poll." Interview. Gallup Organization. N.p., May 2006. Web. 18 May 2015. .
ACLU. "ACLU Amicus Brief in Vacco v. Quill." (1996): 1-27. ACLU Amicus Brief in Vacco v. Quill. 10 Dec. 1996. Web. 18 May 2015.
"Fast Facts." Nightingale Alliance. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 May 2015.
Kass, Leon. "Neither for Love nor Money." Addie Clark Harding Professor, Committee on Social Thought and the College at the University of Chicago. University of Chicago, Chicago. Winter 1989. American Enterprise Institute Biography. Web. 22 May 2015.

Nitschke, Philip. "Euthanasia Sets Sail." National Review Online. 5 June 2001. Web. 22 May 2015.

"Washington v. Glucksberg(." US Supreme Court Majority Opinion. Cornell Law School. 26 June 1997. Web. 22 May 2015.

"ACLU Amicus Brief in Vacco v. Quill." American Civil Liberties Union. 10 Dec. 1996. Web. 22 May 2015.

Dowbiggin, Ian. "5th Century B.C.-1st Century B.C. - Ancient Greeks and Romans Tend to Support Euthanasia." University of Prince Edward Island Faculty Website. N.p., 2003. Web. 22 May 2015.

"When Death Is Sought: Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia in the Medical Context (." Science Musings. N.p., 5 May 2009. Web. 22 May 2015.

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. "Quill v. Vacco." Quill V.Vacco. N.p., 2 Apr. 1996. Web. 22 May 2015.
"Compassion in Dying v. Washington." N.p., 6 Mar. 1996. Web. 22 May 2015.
LAMERS, WILLIAM M.. "Hippocratic Oath." Macmillan Encyclopedia of Death and Dying. 2003. Encyclopedia.com. 22 May. 2015 .