The word “euthanasia” comes from combining two greek words: “Eu” meaning “good”, and “thanatos” meaning “death”. So euthanasia actually means “good death.” The idea is that a death is good if it is painless. Now an important distinction must be made: not all painless deaths are euthanasia. Only those deaths in which an individual directly causes the death of another as a means of eliminating that other person 's pain are euthanasia. For example, if a doctor lethally injects a paraplegic who has many years to live but asks to be put to death because he can’t stand the psychological distress of not having his full mobility--that’s a case of euthanasia. However, a case of someone who dies normally from a disease (for example, from cancer) while under sedation (so that this person does not feel pain) is not euthanasia.
In short: euthanasia involves killing the patient to eliminate the pain, while normal end-of-life care involves eliminating the pain so that the patient can die painlessly, from natural causes (e.g. disease or old age). Nobody is against eliminating the pain when a patient is dying. But everyone should be against killing the patient as a means of eliminating pain.
Some people think they are for euthanasia because they are for allowing a patient to refuse treatment for a terminal illness when that treatment is judged disproportionate. For example, some would say: “If living means I have to be hooked up on life-support machines for months and months, then I would rather die.” However, refusing treatment in this case is not euthanasia. If you have cancer, and you refuse another painful chemotherapy session, and then you die, the cause of death is the cancer, not the doctor or yourself.
We call it euthanasia when your doctor or someone else intentionally causes your death, before your death is caused naturally by disease or by old age. And this is something everyone should be against, in every circumstance. Here’s why:
The Bible tells us
References: June 5, 2001 CON: "The prohibition against killing patients.. Mar. 22, 2005 CON: "Cases like Schiavo 's touch on basic constitutional rights, such as the right to live and the right to due process, and consequently there could very well be a legitimate role for the federal government to play "Frequently Asked Questions," www.internationaltaskforce.org (accessed May 27, 2010) -- Unitarian Universalist Association: The Right to Die With Dignity, 1988 General Resolution Unitarian Universalist Association Sep. 2005 CON: "Not only are we awash in evidence that the prerequisites for a successful living wills policy are unachievable, but there is direct evidence that living wills regularly fail to have their intended effect..