Title: The ethics of euthanasia | Australian Medical Student Journal
Headings: The ethics of euthanasia
The ethics of euthanasia
Nargus Ebrahimi
Introduction
Defining euthanasia
Legal situation of active voluntary euthanasia and assisted suicide
Arguments for and against euthanasia
For
Against
Conclusion
Conflicts of interest
Correspondence
References

Content: Advocates of euthanasia argue that people have a right to make their own decisions regarding death, and that euthanasia is intended to alleviate pain and suffering, hence being ascribed the term “mercy killing.” They hold the view that active euthanasia is not morally worse than the withdrawal or withholding of medical treatment, and erroneously describe this practice as “passive euthanasia.” Such views are contested by opponents of euthanasia who raise the argument of the sanctity of human life and that euthanasia is equal to murder, and moreover, abuses autonomy and human rights. Furthermore, it is said that good palliative care can provide relief from suffering to patients and unlike euthanasia, should be the answer in modern medicine. This article will define several terms relating to euthanasia in order to frame the key arguments used by proponents and opponents of euthanasia. It will also outline the legal situation of euthanasia in Australia and countries abroad. Defining euthanasia
The term “euthanasia” is derived from Greek, literally meaning “good death”. [ 1] Taken in its common usage however, euthanasia refers to the termination of a person’s life, to end their suffering, usually from an incurable or terminal condition. [ 1] It is for this reason that euthanasia was also coined the name “mercy killing”. Various types of euthanasia are recognised.