In this regard, the university pointed out that there are countries where they allow euthanasia because the main requirements are met, as long as they can make a voluntary request. You should know that this type of patient does not mean that he has lost his mind: there are times when a person who suffers from deep depression and has phases when he knows that he does not want to continue like this can make a completely rational request. Canada mandated euthanasia as “medical assistance in dying” in 2016 and approved assisted suicide. In New Zealand, the legislation followed a parallel referendum to the 2020 general election, in which a majority of the population voted in favour of the measure, which will come into force at the end of 2021. There are dominant arguments among supporters and opponents of euthanasia. Those who are convinced of the necessity of this practice claim that the patient must be allowed to put an end to unnecessary and degrading suffering that does not allow him to lead a dignified life, in order to avoid being subjected to therapeutic cruelty resulting from advances in medical science and the desire of doctors to keep alive those who have no hope of recovery (Herrera, undated). I. ARGUMENTS IN DEFENSE OF EUTHANASIA In our society, in general, there is a good argument for what implies a change that breaks with tradition, and on the other hand a dozen (not so good) arguments against, in this sense the legalization of euthanasia would be an example. The strong argument in favor of euthanasia is to put an end to the patient, to put an end to unnecessary and degrading suffering that does not allow him to live a dignified life, but a life full of pain and anguish, a situation that would threaten the free development of his personality and dignity as a human person, thus avoiding being subjected to therapeutic cruelty. Given the progress of medical science and the desire of doctors to keep alive a being without hope of recovery.
In this way, the need arises to legalize euthanasia in order to authorize the exercise of a dignified death under strict conditions that prevent its abuse. There is an idea of quality of life that is often associated with a longer life, said the specialist and author of the book Practice and Ethics of Euthanasia. And he added: “There are interventions in end-of-life medical care that are not euthanasia, but palliative care, which is not aimed at prolonging life, but at giving a quality of life for the time a person has left. It is not about prolonging life, it is about quality of life, as long as people are willing to accept that care; We do not know that they can choose to no longer have this care because they no longer relieve suffering, it is a question of autonomy that is sometimes not respected. “This is an action carried out in the context of medical care, in which a health professional causes the death of a patient by injecting himself with drugs that produce him quickly and painlessly. This must be done at the request of the patient, because he suffers and wants to put an end to this situation. The practice of euthanasia and assisted suicide is embroiled in significant religious, ethical, scientific and legal controversies. Euthanasia has existed and exists all over the world and at all times, although its practice is hidden or veiled. While there are medical professionals who help their patients end the suffering and anguish of incurable diseases or painful deaths, there is also a large sector that refuses to use euthanasia or assisted suicide because its professional and ethical mission is essentially to heal the sick and preserve life. In addition, the patient requesting euthanasia is in a state of inevitable suffering or pain.
“These are patients for whom no medication helps to remove their pain, who ask for death because the pain is unbearable,” he said. In Mexico, the General Health Law prohibits euthanasia in its articles 161 to 21: “The practice of euthanasia, understood as mercy killing, as well as assisted suicide within the meaning of the Federal Penal Code under the protection of this law is prohibited.” What is regulated, however, is the living will, as is the case in Mexico City, the first institution to recognize it by the Advance Directives Act (2008). This law allows for the denial of treatments that prolong life or no longer help the person and cause suffering. Man decides, before his health deteriorates to the point of not being able to express his will, which treatments he receives and which he does not receive, in order to avoid an unnecessary prolongation of his life. For the doctor of bioethics, we have not discussed enough what it means to have freedom at the end of life, because it is euthanasia: that someone knows that he can continue to live with the confidence that when things go very badly, he can ask for help and stop suffering.