Euthanasia refers to intentionally ending a life to relieve suffering from an incurable disease or condition. It can be voluntary, non-voluntary, or involuntary depending on patient consent. Arguments for euthanasia include autonomy, compassion, and controlling suffering, while arguments against include the slippery slope towards non-voluntary euthanasia and that there are alternatives to relieve suffering without intentionally ending a life. Religiously and legally, active euthanasia is generally prohibited but passive euthanasia may be permitted in some circumstances with appropriate safeguards.

2. An ethical issue

3. Coming from Greek
Εὐθανασία → "good death“
εὖ, eu → "well" "good"
θάνατος, thanatos → "death”

4. definition
 The practice of intentionally ending a life to relieve
pain and suffering
 The act of putting to death painlessly or allowing to
die, as by withholding extreme medical measures, a
person or animal suffering from an incurable,
especially a painful, disease or condition
 The painless killing of a patient suffering from an
incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible
coma (oxford dictionary)

6. Assisted suicide….
Euthanasia is the act of deliberately ending
a person's life to relieve suffering.
Assisted suicide is the act of deliberately
assisting or encouraging another person to
kill themselves.
In other words, intentionally helping a
person commit suicide by providing drugs
for self-administration, at that person's
voluntary and competent request.

7. Classification (Based on consent)
Voluntary
Non- Voluntary
Involuntary

8. Voluntary euthanasia is conducted
with the consent of the patient.
Non-voluntary euthanasia is
conducted when the consent of the
patient is unavailable. Examples
include child euthanasia.
Involuntary euthanasia is
conducted against the will of
the patient.

9. Types of euthanasia

11. The difference between "active" and "passive"
euthanasia is that in active euthanasia,
something is done to end the patient's life'
while in passive euthanasia, something is not
done that would have preserved the patient's
life.
An important idea behind this distinction is that
in "passive euthanasia" the doctors are not
actively killing anyone; they are simply not
saving him.

12. Methods using for euthanasia
There are many ways of initiating euthanasia, and
each method can have different outcomes, some
very painful.
Withdrawn or Withheld Treatment
Injections and Drugs
Carbon Monoxide, Helium, Plastic Bags
Dehydration
Nitschke's 'Peaceful' Suicide Pill

13. Arguments for
We need it - 'the compassion argument'.
Supporters of euthanasia believe that allowing
people to ‘die with dignity’ is kinder than
forcing them to continue their lives with
suffering.
We want it - 'the autonomy argument'. Some
believe that every patient has a right to choose
when to die.
We can control it - 'the public policy
argument'. Proponents believe that euthanasia
can be safely regulated by government

14. An ethical argument: according to the
widely accepted ethical principle of respect
for autonomy (freedom of choice), people
should have the right to control their own
body and life (as long as they do not abuse
any other person's rights), and the state
should not create laws that prevent citizens
being able to choose when and how they die.
A pragmatic argument: euthanasia,
especially passive euthanasia, is already a
widespread practice (allegedly), just not one
that people are willing to confess to, so
surely it is better to properly regulate
euthanasia.

15. many of the practices used in end-of-life care are essentially a type
of euthanasia in all but name.
For example, there is the practice of making a 'Do Not Attempt
Resuscitation' (DNAR) order, where a person has requested
that they do not receive treatment if their heart stops beating or
they stop breathing. It is essentially a type of passive euthanasia as
a person is being denied treatment that could potentially save their
life.
Another controversial practice is known as palliative sedation.
This is when a person experiencing extreme suffering, for which
there is no effective treatment, is put to sleep using sedative
medication. For example, palliative sedation is often used to treat
burns victims who are expected to die.
While palliative sedation is not directly carried out for the purpose
of ending lives, many of the sedatives used carry a risk of
shortening a person's lifespan. So it could be argued that palliative
sedation is a type of active euthanasia

16. Utilitarian argument : They believe that any action
should cause the greatest happiness for the
greatest number, and the end result is what
should determine the moral worth of the initial
action. Since Euthanasia will increase happiness
and decrease pain at the same time, then it is
morally correct.
Another argument,While we usually applaud
someone who saves another person's life, we do
not normally condemn someone for failing to do
so. Thus, proponents of euthanasia say that while
we can debate whether active euthanasia should
be legal, there can be no debate about passive
euthanasia: You cannot prosecute someone for

17. Arguments against
.
‘Slippery slope argument: There is no ‘right’ to be killed and
there are real dangers of’. Opening the doors to voluntary
euthanasia could lead to non-voluntary and involuntary
euthanasia, by giving doctors the power to decide when a
patient’s life is not worth living.
We could never truly control it. Reports from the Netherlands,
where euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are legal,
reveal that doctors do not always report it.
The assumption that patients should have a right to die would
impose on doctors a duty to kill, thus restricting the autonomy
of the doctor. Also, a ‘right to die’ for some people might well
become a ‘duty to die’ by others, particularly those who are
vulnerable or dependent upon others.

18. •The alternative argument: there is no reason a person
should suffer either mentally or physically as there are
effective end-of-life treatments available, so euthanasia
is not a valid treatment option but instead represents a
failure on the part of the doctor involved in a person's
care
•The religious argument: these practices can never be
justified for religious reasons, for example many people
believe that only God has the right to end a human life
•The medical ethics argument: asking doctors, nurses
or any other health professional to carry out acts of
euthanasia or assist in a suicide would be a violation of
fundamental medical ethics

19. According to Kant,
An agent who takes his own life acts in
violation of the moral law, suicide,
and, by extension, assisted suicide are
therefore wrong. By a similar argument,
and with a few important exceptions,
killing is wrong; implicitly, then,
voluntary euthanasia is also wrong.

20. The general legal position all over
the world seems to be that while
active euthanasia is illegal unless
there is legislation permitting it.
Passive euthanasia is legal
even without legislation
provided certain conditions
and safeguards are
maintained.

22. Euthanasia being a mode of taking one's own life is seen
under the same legal lens as suicide.
Under criminal law in India, Section 309 of the Indian Penal
Code actually classifies the act of attempted suicide as a
crime punishable by law with imprisonment for a term of up
to one year or a fine or both.
There is some sort of co-relation between suicide and
euthanasia in the sense that both are types of voluntary
ending of one's own life. While the attempt to commit
suicide has been treated as a crime (unless it is proven that
the person attempting to commit the act is of unsound
mind), euthanasia is treated with a little more compassion
by the lawmakers.
Indian penal code says

23. Indian penal code says
Passive euthanasia is legal in India under
exceptional circumstances. On 7 March 2011
the Supreme Court of India legalised passive
euthanasia by means of the withdrawal of life
support to patients in a permanent vegetative
state. The decision was made as part of the verdict
in a case involving Aruna Shanbaug, who had been
in a Persistent Vegetative State (PVS) until her death
in 2015.

24. The Supreme Court specified two
irreversible conditions to permit Passive
Euthanasia Law in its 2011 Law:
(I) The brain-dead for whom the ventilator can
be switched off.
(II) Those in a Persistent Vegetative State (PVS)
for whom the feed can be tapered out and pain-
managing palliatives be added, according to
laid-down international specifications.

25. Morality of euthanasia
People who oppose euthanasia still
believe it's inherently wrong – it can't be
morally justified and even
compassionate motives don't make it
ethically acceptable. ... In other words, if
euthanasia were legalized, the state has
no right to require a justification for its
use by competent, freely consenting
adults.

27. Church says
2276 Those whose lives are diminished or weakened deserve
special respect. Sick or handicapped persons should be helped
to lead lives as normal as possible.
2277 Whatever its motives and means, direct euthanasia
consists in putting an end to the lives of handicapped, sick, or
dying persons. It is morally unacceptable.
Thus an act or omission which, of itself or by intention, causes
death in order to eliminate suffering constitutes a murder gravely
contrary to the dignity of the human person and to the respect
due to the living God, his Creator. The error of judgment into
which one can fall in good faith does not change the nature of
this murderous act, which must always be forbidden and
excluded.

28. 2278 Discontinuing medical procedures that are
burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate
to the expected outcome can be legitimate; it is the refusal
of "over-zealous" treatment. Here one does not will to cause
death; one's inability to impede it is merely accepted. The
decisions should be made by the patient if he is competent
and able or, if not, by those legally entitled to act for the
patient, whose reasonable will and legitimate interests must
always be respected.
2279 Even if death is thought imminent, the ordinary care
owed to a sick person cannot be legitimately interrupted.
The use of painkillers to alleviate the sufferings of the
dying, even at the risk of shortening their days, can be
morally in conformity with human dignity if death is not
willed as either an end or a means, but only foreseen and
tolerated as inevitable Palliative care is a special form of
disinterested charity. As such it should be encouraged.

29. Euthanasia as morally wrong. It has always taught the
absolute and unchanging value of the commandment "You
shall not kill".
 Nothing and no one can in any way permit the killing of an
innocent human being, whether a foetus or an embryo, an
infant or an adult, an old person, or one suffering from an
incurable disease, or a person who is dying.
 Pope John Paul II has spoken out against what he calls a
'culture of death' in modern society, and said that human
beings should always prefer the way of life to the way of
death.

30. Euthanasia is a grave violation of the law of God, since it
is the deliberate and morally unacceptable killing of a
human person.
Pope John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae, 1995
 Church does not accept that human beings have a right to
die. Human beings are free agents, but their freedom
does not extend to the ending of their own lives.
Euthanasia and suicide are both a rejection of God's
absolute sovereignty over life and death.
The church regards any law permitting euthanasia as an
intrinsically unjust law.

31. “ I love my husband. I
cannot bear his suffering..
That’s why ……,”
Love ?

32. “We allow the pet animal
to die in their suffering.
Am I not valuable than
them?”
Should human beings
have the right to decide
on issues of life and
death?
Is there a moral
difference between
killing someone and
letting them die?

33. Life is not my decision then, how death? We
are not free to choose life, parents..etc. Then
not for death also.
 Patients may feel they are a burden on
resources and are psychologically pressured
into consenting. They may feel that the
financial, emotional, and mental burden on
their family is too great.
If the love is truth we should know them.
I would like to say..

34. True compassion leads to
sharing other's pain; it does not
kill the person whose suffering
we cannot bear.
Pope John Paul II, Evangelium
Vitae, 1995

35. The pleas of gravely ill people who
sometimes ask for death are not to be
understood as implying a true desire for
euthanasia; in fact, it is almost always a
case of an anguished plea for help and
love. What a sick person needs, besides
medical care, is love, the human and
supernatural warmth with which the sick
person can and ought to be surrounded
by all those close to him or her, parents
and children, doctors and nurses.
(SACRED CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH
DECLARATION ON EUTHANASIA)

36. Killing and letting to die are just
like commission and omission.
Both are immoral.
 There is a Possibility of recovery.
Very occasionally, a patient recovers,
against all the odds. The diagnosis might
be wrong. We cannot avoid this reality.
 The value of a human being is not
depend on their health ,utility, and
anything.
They are valuable in themselves.