Importance of Legalization of Euthanasia case study of the Philippines

The observational method was used to collect data in this study reacted to euthanasia using the secondary resources. The study does not comprise of complex data analysis, but instead, symbol analysis was used to acquire adequate data and research was therefore conducted for a short period. Theologians and other professionals argue that euthanasia is morally unacceptable and should not be practiced. The best euthanasia is the one that a patient is morally able to decide to accept it. Legalization of euthanasia in the Philippines is significant to relive persons from pain and suffering. Research questions 1. What is the importance of legalizing euthanasia in the Philippines? 2. What is the current nature of euthanasia in the Philippines? 3. What does literature suggest about euthanasia cases? Statement of the Problem Mercy killing had been practiced in the Philippines for long, but euthanasia remains illegal.

To respect the consent of persons with mental challenges, those who are very ill and the wish of many families, legalization of euthanasia should be allowed. Netherlands and Luxembourg legalized euthanasia in 2001 and 2009 respectively. Euthanasia is necessary because it helps people to get rid of the physical pain they are undergoing that often gives them mental suffering. It, therefore, aims at taking away the life of an individual without causing physical pain and its arrived at to relieve a person from persistent pains and sufferings due to some fatal acts on their lives. Voluntary euthanasia works to obey the consent of the person whose life is being terminated. The Dutch parliamentary system was able to make it into law on April 10th, 2001.

The Christian social party and the Catholic Church in Luxembourg interfered with the legalization of the law, but their votes did not guarantee them a win. Luxembourg euthanasia law is expected to take action by the end of the summer. The law succeeded by thirty to twenty-six votes. The description of Luxembourg euthanasia law is a meaningful way to terminate life politely. The implication of euthanasia laws in these countries uniformly is a deep separation between the church and the state. Secondary resources provide data about euthanasia in the Philippines and other countries and further describe its importance (Materstvedt et al. The study does not, thus, comprise of complex data analysis, but instead, symbol analysis was used to acquire sufficient data.

In this case, research was conducted for a short period. The data collected comprised of a piece of information from the government hospitals where doctors and patients gave their views on euthanasia. The data collected was not fixed to a group of people but a broad spectrum of those who suffered critical illnesses in the hospitals both males and females. It is also essential for economic costs and human resources in the country. In this case, there are fewer hospital beds with many patients hence there is no need to keep those who will be willing to die but instead offer them assisted suicide to create space. 10, 000 physicians described that approximately sixteen percent of them tend to consider halting the life-sustaining therapy in consideration of the demand from the patient families (Emanuel et al.

More than forty-four percent of the physicians in the Philippines prefer euthanasia. Many patients prefer the application of euthanasia especially when there is hope of recovery. Euthanasia had been illegal in the country but legalizing it had been called upon by various parties. Palliative sedation and life-saving treatment are legal in the Philippines and therefore euthanasia ought to be legalized. It is necessary to make it legal to protect the person from going through excruciating pain to have a dignified death. Legalizing euthanasia would save the country resources such as the hospital beds and reduce the burden of doctors offering daily medication to persons who can no longer be well. Theologians and other professionals argue that euthanasia is morally unacceptable and should not be practiced.