Reading Response Assignment Description
Reading responses are an opportunity for you to practice critically engaging with texts. Although
these are shorter pieces of writing, they should be sophisticated pieces of writing that
demonstrate a refined and critical analysis of our readings as well as your own personal reaction
to and experience with the text. Your short reading response should be 250 words (~one page,
12 point, Times New Roman, 1 inch margins). At the beginning of the paper, spend at least a
paragraph explaining the author’s main argument and how they go about making it in an ethical
manner (in other words, you should explain it in such a way that the author would say, “Yes,
that’s exactly what I mean!”). The rest of the paper can give your response.
Some questions that might stimulate your thinking include:
1) Which aspect(s) of the argument persuaded or failed to persuade you?
2) What unstated assumptions are in play? Are they valid?
3) Who do you think the author’s audience was? How do you know? How does the author
tailor his or her argument to the audience?
4) What was the author’s purpose in writing this selection? Is there a call to action?
5) What is a valid counter-argument to the author’s perspective?
The choose of life
Euthanasia is the practice of ending a life prematurely so as to end pain and
suffering. This process is also known as Mercy killing. It falls into different categories
like voluntary euthanasia, which is carried out with permission of an individual whose
life is then taken, and involuntary euthanasia, which is carried out without the
permission of an individual and it is described as criminal execution (Gorsuch, 3).
The moral and social practices surround these cases. There are many Supreme Court
cases that also surround this issue. Controversies are everywhere about whether the
Euthanasia should be legalized or not. Considering the legal standpoint, the American
Law categorizes mercy killing as cases of criminal homicide, but The Judiciary
portrays that not all homicides are illegal. The act of killing is considered as excusable
in terms of criminal punishment but inexcusable once it is carried out for any other
reason. Therefore I propose that, euthanasia should be legalized because people have
right to their self-determination and they should be allowed to decide the act on their
Some of the reasons refuse euthanasia is ridiculous. They said that bible show us
we can kill people no matter other people or oneself, so we can choose euthanasia
because euthanasia is a kind of suicide. Some of the doctors said that their mission is
keep peoples life, so they can give up of any people who are still alive. In the other
side to think of that, keep people life and let them stay with meaningless painful,
don’t you think that is tormenting them? Did bible say that you can torment people?
Did the teacher of doctors teach you to torment people? No! Never! These reason are
so weak and ridiculous.
People’s privacy is very important and they should have the right to choose their
death since it is better to die than to suffer (Manning, 2). Suffering happens because of
experiencing terminal illness. This suffering can be mental or physical. Mental
suffering may sound quite painful but it’s not easy to withstand. A decision made by
an individual whether to live or to die does not depend on doctors or the government;
it is a personal decision and it should be adhered to. Since the governments have
given the rights to decide on sex preference, religion, family and even jobs, it’s also
advisable and lawful to have a right to decide whether to die or to live since death is a
The euthanasia should be legalized because it does not shorten life. This means
that, euthanasia is irreversible. The patient dies and there is no identification which
specifies that the patient had an unexpected recovery around the corner. Contrary, if
all the nations had legalized euthanasia, its clearly revealing that, the exclusive
preserve of the terminally ill could be out of date. The life of the patient who is
painful is quite awkwardly and the practice of euthanasia earlier can help ease the
physical suffering a person experiences. The public supports the practice of
euthanasia and there is no need of illegalizing because a patient or an individual has a
right to choose when to die.
It also should be legalized because it makes economic sense. The economic
sense has something to do with medication expenses due to prolonged treatment of
the patient (Biggs, 2). Considering the time wasted and money in such a situation, its
better to prefer euthanasia because the patient might die with all the expenses and no
recovering but the euthanasia would have saved the money.
The other reason as to why euthanasia should be legalized is because the doctors
have liberty to create life and therefore since they involve in euthanasia practice they
should be able to end a life in any way. This right has been given to them by the
governments and therefore the governments have a right to give the doctors in order
to engage in euthanasia act and end the life (Biggs 5). The doctors play a big role in
human’s perspectives, and therefore in most cases the doctors assists patients in each
way, so the way doctors accomplishes the patient’s wants the way should consider any
act requested by the patient.
Another basic thing which has to make the practice of euthanasia to be legalized
is because euthanasia stops a person from having bad quality of life. Since the
doctor’s function is not only the curing of diseases but also providing better quality of
life to patients, the doctors should not extension the suffering of patients, but they
should take any action to end the pain (Keown 1). When the patient reaches such a
situation of ending his/her life, the doctors should be allowed to grant whatever the
patient want; no matter what since it patient’s destiny. The act of helping the patient
acquire and life quality life is the patient’s decision and no one should involve in
between this decision.
Euthanasia should also be legalized simply because it would target the
vulnerable. There is a myth which is spread with statements that, assisting a patient to
die and the family members either old, young or disabled leads to an absolute fear and
even pressure. The euthanasia practice has no effect on the family members since they
ought to be safer when their member decides to die peacefully. Instead, the vulnerable
seems to be not more interested in receiving assistance death like any other class of
life (Keown, 4). The other thing is that, legalizing euthanasia would not open the
floodgates thus leading to a city murder concerning the worldly practices.
This means that, once the euthanasia is legalized, the world would not turn and
begun operating on the act but the people have to minimizes the action because of
they already can define when is the time to stop the pain with meaningless. Secondly,
euthanasia being legalized worldwide does not mean that, the world is of murder but
the emergency actions have to be taken either immediate or urgent (Lavi, 5). The
Hippocratic Oath which is designed a guide for doctors in their medical work (FIRST
DO NO HARM).This is famous maxim which literally means that, the doctors should
not artificially keep someone alive when death is preferred. This is identified when
the patient is in an intense pain or suffering severely the society could not be doing
more harm by keeping patients alive than allowing them to die. The euthanasia should
be legalized in order to help anyone who is wishing or have desires to death.
In conclusion, if euthanasia being legalize, it must be more good than harm. The
people who are getting torment by sick, they can get relief; the people who refuse
euthanasia, they can ignore this choose. It help us to save time, resource, and stop the
meaningless painful. It is a way to upgrade our life.
Anderson, J. M. (1997). Guide to state medicaid managed care laws and rules.
Alexandria, Va: Capitol Publications.
Dugger, K., Franzini, L., Hanis, C. L., & University of Texas Health Science Center at
Houston, School of Public Health. (2008). Health care policy analysis of Medicaid's
early and periodic screening, diagnosis, and treatment (EPSDT) benefit in Colorado.
(Masters Abstracts International, 47-2.)
In Kongstvedt, P. R. (2003). A study guide to Essentials of managed health care.
Gaithersburg(Maryland: Aspen Publishers.
Purchase answer to see full