Euthanasia
'good death': εὖ, eu, 'well, good' + θάνατος, thanatos, 'death') is the practice of intentionally ending life to eliminate pain and suffering.
The British House of Lords select committee on medical ethics defines euthanasia as "a deliberate intervention undertaken with the express intention of ending a life to relieve intractable suffering".
[4] The Dutch law, however, does not use the term 'euthanasia' but includes the concept under the broader definition of "assisted suicide and termination of life on request".
Non-voluntary euthanasia occurs when a patient's consent is unavailable and is legal in some countries under certain limited conditions, in both active and passive forms.
"[12] Definitions such as those offered by the House of Lords Select committee on Medical Ethics take this path, where euthanasia is defined as "a deliberate intervention undertaken with the express intention of ending a life, to relieve intractable suffering.
The first apparent usage of the term "euthanasia" belongs to the historian Suetonius, who described how the Emperor Augustus, "dying quickly and without suffering in the arms of his wife, Livia, experienced the 'euthanasia' he had wished for.
"[23] The word "euthanasia" was first used in a medical context by Francis Bacon in the 17th century to refer to an easy, painless, happy death, during which it was a "physician's responsibility to alleviate the 'physical sufferings' of the body."
In the definitions offered by Beauchamp and Davidson and, later, by Wreen, consent on the part of the patient was not considered one of their criteria, although it may have been required to justify euthanasia.
Euthanasia, in the sense of the deliberate hastening of a person's death, was supported by Socrates, Plato and Seneca the Elder in the ancient world, although Hippocrates appears to have spoken against the practice, writing "I will not prescribe a deadly drug to please someone, nor give advice that may cause his death" (noting there is some debate in the literature about whether or not this was intended to encompass euthanasia).
[32]The concept of euthanasia in the sense of alleviating the process of death goes back to the medical historian Karl Friedrich Heinrich Marx, who drew on Bacon's philosophical ideas.
In 1678, the publication of Caspar Questel's De pulvinari morientibus non-subtrahend, ("On the pillow of which the dying should not be deprived"), initiated debate on the topic.
[30]: 211 Despite opposition, euthanasia continued to be practised, involving techniques such as bleeding, suffocation, and removing people from their beds to be placed on the cold ground.
[38]: 794 Williams' proposal was to use chloroform to deliberately hasten the death of terminally ill patients: That in all cases of hopeless and painful illness, it should be the recognized duty of the medical attendant, whenever so desired by the patient, to administer chloroform or such other anaesthetic as may by-and-bye supersede chloroform – so as to destroy consciousness at once, and put the sufferer to a quick and painless death; all needful precautions being adopted to prevent any possible abuse of such duty; and means being taken to establish, beyond the possibility of doubt or question, that the remedy was applied at the express wish of the patient.The essay was favourably reviewed in The Saturday Review, but an editorial against the essay appeared in The Spectator.
[41] Kemp notes that at the time, medical doctors did not participate in the discussion; it was "essentially a philosophical enterprise ... tied inextricably to a number of objections to the Christian doctrine of the sanctity of human life".
[39] The rise of the euthanasia movement in the United States coincided with the so-called Gilded Age, a time of social and technological change that encompassed an "individualistic conservatism that praised laissez-faire economics, scientific method, and rationalism", along with major depressions, industrialisation and conflict between corporations and labour unions.
[44] The first attempt to legalise euthanasia took place in the United States, when Henry Hunt introduced legislation into the General Assembly of Ohio in 1906.
[45]: 614 Hunt did so at the behest of Anna Sophina Hall, a wealthy heiress who was a major figure in the euthanasia movement during the early 20th century in the United States.
[45]: 614–616 Hunt's bill called for the administration of an anesthetic to bring about a patient's death, so long as the person is of lawful age and sound mind, and was suffering from a fatal injury, an irrevocable illness, or great physical pain.
[48] Parties that consented to the killing included Hitler's office, the parents, and the Reich Committee for the Scientific Registration of Serious and Congenitally Based Illnesses.
Its code name Aktion T4 is derived from Tiergartenstraße 4, a street address of the Chancellery department which recruited and paid personnel associated with the program.
He explains that the Nazi version of "euthanasia" was based on the work of Adolf Jost, who published The Right to Death (Das Recht auf den Tod) in 1895.
[51]In modern terms, the use of "euthanasia" in the context of Aktion T4 is seen to be a euphemism to disguise a program of genocide, in which people were killed on the grounds of "disabilities, religious beliefs, and discordant individual values".
Roman Catholic religious leaders criticized the petition, saying that such a bill would "legalize a suicide-murder pact" and a "rationalization of the fifth commandment of God, 'Thou Shalt Not Kill.
[64][65] The judicial sense of the term "homicide" includes any intervention undertaken with the express intention of ending a life, even to relieve intractable suffering.
[70] Unlike physician-assisted suicide, withholding or withdrawing life-sustaining treatments with patient consent (voluntary) is almost unanimously considered, at least in the United States, to be legal.
[78] Similarly, a 2017 Doctors.net.uk poll reported in the British Medical Journal stated that 55% of doctors believe assisted dying, in defined circumstances, should be legalised in the UK.
Among Protestant denominations, the Episcopal Church passed a resolution in 1991 opposing euthanasia and assisted suicide stating that it is "morally wrong and unacceptable to take a human life to relieve the suffering caused by incurable illnesses.
The various positions on the cessation of medical treatment are mixed and considered a different class of action than direct termination of life, especially if the patient is suffering.
Passive euthanasia was declared legal by Israel's highest court under certain conditions and has reached some level of acceptance.
[97] Although there is no absolute consensus, Hinduism generally views euthanasia as a serious act that conflicts with core principles such as Dharma (duty), Karma (actions and their consequences), and Ahimsa (non-violence).
