Euthanasia is a medical process which consists of ending the life of a patient suffering from a chronic illness who, once abandoned , would eventually succumb to the disease. There are two forms of euthanasia: active euthanasia and passive euthanasia. Passive euthanasia occurs when a patient is allowed to die naturally by withdrawing or withholding their medications, water, and diet. According to the law and the legal system, passive euthanasia is generally legal. These decisions are based on the facts of specific cases. Despite the differences in definition, active and passive euthanasia follow the same process and produce the same results. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get an original essay On the other hand, active euthanasia is also known as medical assistance in dying. It is when a sick person's life is intentionally ended by unnatural means. Usually the process involves the lethal inoculation of a prescribed drug. However, there are additional methods, such as depriving the patient of oxygen. The subject of euthanasia has significantly created a controversial issue whenever an individual considers it on a legal, religious and health basis. This is because this act is an easy method to end a patient's life and some of the patient's relationships may not agree with the process. Differences of opinion on whether to euthanize a patient usually create conflict between family members. Many sticky situations arise from the topic of euthanasia, as most legal establishments view the process as suicide. Patients who opt for the process are considered to have committed suicide, while those who have performed it are considered to have committed murder. Additionally, debate takes center stage in society because different people have different views on the process. For example, some question whether it is legal to end the life of a sick person or a family member who is experiencing anxiety. They also wonder if the process is different from killing someone. As such, the debate centers on whether it is right for a person to decide on their own to end a patient's life without the individual's consent. Certain fundamental ethical and legal factors surround the process of euthanasia. As such, the permitted topic around euthanasia concerns advanced orders and leaving wills for other people. Sometimes, with these incentives, the language used contributes to misunderstanding, thus forcing doctors to provide clarification. Additionally, the euthanasia case study poses a legal problem because the argument focuses on why a parent would choose to end a child's life when the child has been struggling with illness. much longer. Parents and guardians have the freedom to make decisions regarding their children's health care. However, this should not mean that clinicians and parents should ignore children from deliberations and decisions about their health care and livelihoods. In the state of Indiana, a law was passed that allows people with a terminal illness to meet specific qualifications before asking a medical professional for a medication that they can register themselves themselves to end a patient's life. The law also posits specific qualifications that a clinician must possess to recommend treatment to aindividual. Furthermore, it excludes an insurer from refusing compensation for benefits under a life protection scheme on the basis of a section relating to suicide in the life compensation scheme. Consequently, compensation must be paid to the family of the insured person by the insurer provided that the death of the insured person results from medical assistance in dying. However, the law makes it a level 1 misdemeanor if an individual: intentionally or knowingly or exerts unjustifiable influence over an individual to seek an order to end an individual's life or terminate an individual's life to a patient's life. Second, the law also establishes a Level 1 felony when an individual, without the patient's authorization, knowingly forges, conceals, destroys, or modifies a prescription request to cause the death of a patient. The moral questions surrounding euthanasia are those that decide whether or not an individual should submit to the process, whether or not it is principled. Furthermore, ethical issues question the circumstances under which the process is justifiable and whether the process is passive or active or involuntary or voluntary. As such, it is essential to employ the skills of highly qualified professionals, infirmary beds, equipment and prescriptions for patients who wish to live rather than those who do not. Despite all these factors, only the sick person understands what they feel, how the physical and reactive pain of illness and prolonged death influence the quality of their life. There are several controversial cases surrounding the euthanasia process. For example, a nine-year-old child with cystic fibrosis and his blood relatives agreed to him undergoing active euthanasia. The parents consented to the process because they did not want to continue treatment because a medical professional thought it would be healthier for the child. The case study raises both ethical and legal questions about why a clinician would advocate for the death of a child when they may have battled the illness much longer. Following the clinician's recommendation, the child's parents were also affected. The parents experienced traumatic grief as they watched their child die. In most cases, the patient's family members always tend to blame themselves for not being able to reverse the process when they realize that their relationship would have lasted a little longer if the parents had not consented to the process. Controversies surrounding the process, some countries have advocated for the legalization of euthanasia. However, the legalization of the medical process has faced a multitude of distinctive impacts, both positive and negative. The legalization of euthanasia has been a subject of debate since the beginnings of modern medicine. The legalization of euthanasia will allow suffering patients to finally grant their last wish. I believe in legalizing euthanasia to help those who are suffering and help them die. As such, I support this process because I believe that every individual has the freedom to do whatever they want with their body. The legalization of euthanasia, however, has its positive and negative consequences. Legalizing the process would result in many deaths of people suffering from depression and people being euthanized against their will. According to research, approximately 1 in 10 cancer deaths are due to euthanasia, showing that practitioners are quick to give up and take advantage of a patient's depression. If doctors manage to avoid these unethical practices, they might entertain the idea of ​​euthanizing individuals in order to escape the burden ofresolve patient problems. Families may also be ready to give up as the cost of hospital bills becomes a factor. Caring for a sick loved one can be a financial burden for families, who may therefore opt for euthanasia. Additionally, the least educated and poorest minorities are the most vulnerable if the process is legalized. The loss of a loved one through euthanasia will not demonstrate that doctors are responsible. Therefore, doctors can carry out euthanasia without the consent of the patient's family. This is attributed to the inability to afford hospital funds and also the ignorance of doctors who become lazy in the face of a large number of patients. As a result, practitioners usually end up administering the drugs on patients, but later blame them for natural death. The process also denies some family members the opportunity to say their final words to the patient, as some family members are usually not present throughout the process. Additionally, religious concerns were a significant setback in the legalization of euthanasia. Many religious people, especially Christians, trust in life as a reward and taking it away is an authority that only has its place with God. Catholic bishops in the United States have actively opposed euthanasia, making the legal adoption of this process a daunting task for the country. This is due to the important role religion plays in the country's decision-making process. On the other hand, legalizing euthanasia also has long-term benefits. The process ends an individual's suffering. In a 1996 court case regarding the euthanasia process, the American Civil Liberties Union argued that the right of an emotionally stable patient facing an incurable illness to choose an appropriate and honorable death, rather than experience excruciating pain in its final days, was considered legal in the perception of methodical freedom. As such, allowing patients to voluntarily end their anxiety is not only justified but also necessary to safeguard the right to individual and physical independence. Additionally, people in the final stages of their incurable illness often end up becoming incapacitated. They usually depend on loved ones and nurses for basic tasks such as showering, going to the toilet, and bathing. This can be humiliating for patients. Therefore, they tend to choose to die with dignity through the process of euthanasia. Giving a dying person the ability to make decisions about when and how they wish to die allows them to take control of their existence. Additionally, euthanasia also helps eliminate the fear of financial burden. Insufficient funding for pain management and remedial care, as well as the resilience of administration in residential institutions, have contributed to the despair of older people. As a result, people prefer to settle for euthanasia rather than spend large sums of money on nursing homes, but their lives are limited. Many dying people still want to help others live as they have a limited life. They always don't want other people to suffer and go through the same sufferings in life as them. The incurable disease can spread and, in most cases, lead to destruction of the body and organ failure. Euthanized patients can donate their organs to other patients to save their lives. Thus, if euthanasia.