Legal Perspective on Euthanasia Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2750 words

Legal Perspective on Euthanasia - Term Paper Example Nevertheless, even the issue of going through legal proceedings becomes contentious in several instances because some individuals think that the ‘right to die’ must be decided personally (Devettere 70). Even though individuals with these thoughts may seek advice from medical professionals or spiritual counselor, the concept of a legal resolution is detested because the act of placing the decision on another person meddles with a person’s rights to liberty and freewill. Numerous legal cases concerning euthanasia use the U.S. Constitution to support their judgments. They refer to privacy and liberty rights, protected by the Constitution, as the basis for a person’s right to decide how and when death should take place. Numerous individuals and groups supporting euthanasia claim that the reasonable step to take in the future is to constitutionally guarantee the ‘right to die’ (Keown 89). Even though legal decisions that support euthanasia somehow s et precedents which advocates can eventually use in future cases, making euthanasia legal would offer stronger protection under the constitution. Critics of euthanasia, in contrast, assert that euthanasia must not be legalized. This essay critically analyzes the legal perspective on euthanasia. Euthanasia: An Overview When patients and their loved ones see misery and intolerable pain, disagreement usually occurs between patients and their families, who want to put an end to misery, and medical practitioners, who are instructed to save human lives. This disagreement focuses on the notion of euthanasia and its value in the contemporary period. The issue of euthanasia forces an individual to face the greatest fear of human beings—death. The legal system has confronted it and has made progress in establishing certain rules to help decision makers in this issue; unfortunately, there is still a long way to go. Society should be safeguarded from the undesirable possibilities related to allowing the taking out of life-support mechanisms. Society cannot permit the complicated matters related to this issue to be underestimated to the point where it is simply recognized that life can be subjectively or instinctively terminated. The law should make sure that the patient’s constitutional rights are protected, while preserving society’s concern for life, and strengthening the integrity of health care professionals. During a medical emergency, it is impractical to instruct a health care provider to first check the patient’s clinical record for prior instructions before addressing the patient’s urgent needs (Pozgar 124). Ultimately, the limits of patient’s rights are still quite vague. Over time, euthanasia has become a subject matter with opposing moral, medical, and legal repercussions. Today, there are passionate campaigns supporting dignified death, which prohibits tubes, monitors, machines, and other technical equipment (Biggs 15 ). Even the definition of ‘euthanasia’ has evolved over time. Euthanasia is generally defined as â€Å"the mercy killing of the hopelessly ill, injured, or incapacitated† (Pozgar 124). In the 1870s, literature on euthanasia started to surface, mostly in the United States and England. Even though this literature was written, primarily, by ordinary people, medical professionals and the public started to pay attention to the issues posed by euthanasia (Biggs 25). During that time, euthanasia is viewed as

Anti-Discrimination Law in the UK Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3000 words

Anti-Discrimination Law in the UK - Essay Example What has the provisions of this Act imply to organizations? In the performance of its functions, a firm must pay special cognizance to three aspects covered by or under the Act (Rivers, 2012): 1. Avoid and eliminate any conduct that has the effect of constituting harassment, victimization, discrimination or any other prohibited conduct 2. Culture equality for every persons who share the ‘protected characteristics’ and those who do not with regard to opportunities 3. Encourage proper relations amongst individuals with the relevant protected characteristics and also those who do not Section 71 of the Act regards discrimination against sex in relation to pay. Section 77 refers to discrimination through the discussions over terms of pay. Section 78 provides regulations on gender pay gap (www.legislation.gov.uk, 2010).These sections have gone some way to strengthening the statutory enforcement of equal pay between men and women within public entities. However, government†™s failure to enact one of these three critical provisions may ultimately hamper the effectiveness of the Act. In analysing the aforementioned sectional provisions and assessing their potential impact in combatting discrimination with regard to employment, it is imperative to understand first what variables are prevalent in laws on societal equality (Rivers, 2012).The mystery that is equality rests within the (misconception in) Western political tradition that views equality as a fundamental and universal moral characteristic of human beings; of equal dignity and worth (Dworkin, 2002). It stretches beyond the Aristotelian definition of a purely formal existence, which postulates that likes be treated similarly, and differences proportionately. Most importantly is the acknowledgement of the uniqueness of human beings. Therefore, equality would intimate that people be valued both in their uniqueness and similarities. Firstly, we address the object variable which answers the question , ‘what exactly is subject to the equality principle?’ This is easily answerable at a highly abstract level. All humans being equal in rights and dignity deserve equal respect and concern. However, in practice this presents a fairly complex ideal covering not only civil and political rights but a myriad of welfare, opportunity and resources. John Rawls identified within his justice theory two principles of equality in which the justification of differences was only valid should they benefit the least well-off and related to positions held under fair opportunities. These were equality of liberty and that of fundamental (basic) social goods. Secondly, the characteristic variable, which defines who the recipient(s) of the principle are and why they merit such special treatment. Article 14 of the European Convention of Human rights states that all rights should be enjoyed by all regardless of distinction. Initially and subsequent to this proclamation, there was much resista nce towards identifying specific benchmarks that merit special attention. Presently, practical concerns aimed at addressing ingrained bias and social exclusion have developed into a rallying cry for equality as a human right-born out of Civil Rights movements (Rivers, 2012).