1

Annotated Bibliography Euthanasia

Ana Valdez
The University of Texas at El Paso

Benjamin, H. (2009, October 12). To Kill or Not to Kill: Two experts debate the morality of
euthanasia. The Nation. Retrieved March 8, 2015, from
http://www.thenation.com/article/euthanasia-pro-and-con#
Harry Benjamins argument is supporting euthanasia for terminally ill patients. The
author recounts a personal story about a friend that suffered from cancer and would not
resort to euthanasia as a way of ending his suffering. This article speaks of how people
might not seek euthanasia due to the fact that they are either expecting that a cure will be
discovered and save them or because their religious beliefs do not allow them to think
euthanasia as an alternative. Benjamin states that euthanasia should always be an
alternative for the sake of the patients. A patient should not be forced to live with their
suffering until their last moments of life.

Harry Benjamins purpose of this article is to convince people that euthanasia is not
amiss. The article itself is biased on the grounds of the author talking about the reasons
why euthanasia is something that should be practiced by patients who have had enough of
their suffering. With the previous information, this source will help with representing one
point of view on the issue of euthanasia.

Padbury, S. (2015). Colorado lawmakers reject assisted suicide legislation. World Magazine.
Retrieved from
http://www.worldmag.com/2015/02/colorado_lawmakers_reject_assisted_suicide_legislation
In this magazine article, Sarah Padbury, narrates the hearing that took place in Colorado
with the attempt to legalize assisted suicide in the state. She shows statements said at the
hearing from both points of view. People with different standpoints attended the hearing
and conveyed their opinion on the issue of euthanasia and its legalization in the state of
Colorado. At the end of the hearing the legislative committee voted against euthanasia
and did not approve the bill that would legalize assisted suicide.

This articles purpose is to portray the different points of view that people have on the
issue of legalizing assisted suicide. This article is also to inform people of what is
happening in the United States concerning euthanasia. This magazine article is beneficial
to writing an essay that will depict both sides of the controversial issue of euthanasia.

Bernards, N. (1995). Should euthanasia be legalized? In Wekesser, C (Ed.), Euthanasia opposing

viewpoints (pp. 63-98). San Diego, CA: Greenhaven Press, Inc.
There is big controversy on whether Euthanasia should be legalized. Chapter 2 of
Euthanasia Opposing Viewpoints contains articles of different points of view concerning
euthanasia. For example, the article called, Legalizing Euthanasia Would Harm
Society, by Charles J. Dougherty, does not agree that euthanasia should be legalized
because it would devalue life. Dougherty believes that if you give a patient the right to
decide whether to live or commit assisted suicide, all patients will feel obligated to seek
euthanasia. He also states that if euthanasia is an option, then there would be no need for
hospice care and no taxes would need to be raised for medical care. The message that
Dougherty is trying to get across is that if euthanasia is legalized, it would be the easy
way out for patients. Patients would not even try to seek treatment, and that is why
euthanasia should not be enforced.

The purpose of this article is to try to convince people into thinking that euthanasia
should not be legalized because it would limit the patients desire to live. This article is
based on an opinion making it lack the rhetorical appeal logos. With this information, my
Community Problem Report will contain information about euthanasia from different
perspectives.

Bernards, N. (1995). Should physicians assist in euthanasia? In Wekesser, C (Ed.),

Euthanasia opposing viewpoints (pp. 100-137). San Diego, CA: Greenhaven Press, Inc.
Chapter 3 in the book Euthanasia Opposing Viewpoints, contains articles concerning
euthanasia and the argument that physicians should or should not assist in euthanasia.
Viewpoint one in the chapter is called, Physicians Should Assist in Euthanasia and is
written by Timothy E. Quill. Quill argues that physicians should assist in euthanasia
because it is their duty to repress the patients suffering even if that means ending their
life. Quill asserts that by not giving physicians the right to assist euthanasia, they are
being restricted to empathize with their patients. He wants physicians to be able to
connect with their patients and be able to end their suffering when they can no longer be
cured with any medical assistance. Timothy Quill desires the legalization of physician
assisted suicide because he thinks people and doctors should have the right to decide
whether a person has ability to continue living with no suffering.

The information given in this article is biased towards allowing physicians to assist
euthanasia making it a non-reliable article. This article gives reasons as to why doctors
should be able to empathize with their patients and end their suffering. This source is
useful for my upcoming assignment because it shows the argument that the legalization
of euthanasia should happen.

Bernards, N. (1995). Is euthanasia ethical? In Wekesser, C (Ed.), Euthanasia opposing

viewpoints (pp. 16-61). San Diego, CA: Greenhaven Press, Inc.
Viewpoint two in chapter one of Euthanasia Opposing Viewpoints is called Euthanasia
is Unethical, and it is written by Ronald Otremba. This article talks about how life is
valuable in all aspects and it should not be determined by a persons emotional, physical,
economic, or social status; life is valuable no matter what. Otremba claims that it is not
moral to end someones life even if they are suffering, life does not lose its value even
when the person is in pain. He also says that God should be the only one to create and
end life, not physicians. Otremba states that there is a difference between ending a
patients treatment and ending their life. Ending their treatment is not wrong because the
doctor is not killing the patient, the doctor is just shortening the patients life. Ronald
Otremba takes a stand on the issue of euthanasia and believes it should not be legalized
because it is not ethical.
This article is biased and brings religion into the argument that euthanasia is
unethical, to some people that may seem unreliable, to others it might be credible.
The purpose of Otremba writing this article is to persuade people into believing
that euthanasia is unethical. This article will help me with my Community Report
Problem by providing information about how religious people are a part of society
that does not agree that euthanasia is ethical.

Bush, S. (1996). Two Views Of Euthanasia. Chicago Tribune. Retrieved from

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1996-05-06/news/9605060017_1_euthanasia-patientpsychiatrists
In this article, Sylvia Bushs argument is that euthanasia should be done as soon as the
patient decides that euthanasia is the right choice. She does not agree with Dr. Sanford A.
Franzblau who says that in order for physicians to assist euthanasia there has to be some
rules. These rules include: (1) the patient [must be] conscious and lucid (Bush,
1996) (2) Next [they] need "written requests for euthanasia signed by the patient and the
next of kin," all of which are to be submitted to a judge. (Bush, 1996) (3) Next, [they]
are supposed to wait for the judge to review the testimony of the psychiatrists; then he is
to impanel a committee of three physicians who are specialists in the illness involved.
(Bush, 1996) (4) After the physicians have completed their reviews of the case, they
then must report back to the judge, who can then issue an order to allow the euthanasia to
take place. (Bush, 1996). Bush believes too much time will pass before euthanasia can
be practiced on the patient, the patient would go through unnecessary pain and suffering.
She claims that a patient should decide when euthanasia should be practiced, no one
should prevent a patient from ending their suffering.

The purpose of this news article is to persuade physicians as well as the public to let
patients decide when they are ready for euthanasia to be practiced on them. If the patient
has the right to decide he/she wants to end their life, they should also be given the right to
decide when that should happen. Bushs argument is not all reliable because her
statements are biased, there is not much credibility to her arguments. Two Views Of

Euthanasia will aid in my writing about a community problem report by providing

information on patients who are for euthanasia.

Sanders, K., Chaloner, C. (2007) Voluntary euthanasia: ethical concepts and definitions.
Nursing Standard. 21, 35, 41-44.
The article Voluntary Euthanasia: Ethical Concepts and Definitions informs people about
what euthanasia really means and the ethical concepts many people have about it.
Sanders and Chaloner define euthanasia as a deliberate intervention or omission with
the express intention of hastening or ending an individual's life, to relieve intractable pain
or suffering. There have been many ethical issues with euthanasia, everyone has a
different perspective of the legalization of euthanasia. One example of an ethical
perspective is the belief that patients should have the right to decide whether euthanasia is
the right choice for him/her. The physician should respect the patients choice because the
physician does not know how much pain the patient is putting up with. Another ethical
perspective is that euthanasia is immoral, God does not believe in suicide. When people
bring religion into the issue of euthanasia, they assert that no one should aid another
person to commit suicide, they are sinning by helping another person sin.

The reason for Sanders and Chaloner to write this article was to inform people about
what euthanasia means. Not many people know about euthanasia and the issues there is
with the legalization of it, this article informs the public about these issues. This article

will help me with my Community Problem Report by providing the meaning of

euthanasia, and the ethical concepts behind this complex topic.
Mihaela, A. (2012). Contemporary Readings in Law and Social Justice, 4(2), 474483.
In Mihaelas article information on euthanasia is provided for people who want to be
informed about what euthanasia is and the different attitudes toward the topic. Mihaela
states that, Euthanasia is deliberate killing committed under the impulse of compassion
in order to relieve the physical pains of a person suffering from an incurable disease and
whose death is, therefore, inevitable. What she means that physicians compassion
toward patients is the cause of euthanasia, there has to be compassion from the doctor to
practice euthanasia. Some people believe that the legalization of euthanasia would be like
legalizing homicide by doctors. Doctors are given the right to kill a person when that
patient no longer wants to live and the physician empathizes with them. Other people
believe that the cost of terminal disease treatment is too expensive to preserve, if a person
that is terminally ill wants to end his/her life physicians should be able to do it in order to
stop money from being spent on expensive treatments.

This article contains a big amount of sources from many studies mentioned, this makes
the article reliable because it also contains information about different perspectives on the
topic of euthanasia. The article is not biased toward only one side or the argument which
makes this article trustworthy. Mihaelas article will help provide information on different
perspectives on the issue of euthanasia and will help support both arguments.