Euthanasia: the debate over deathA recent survey conducted by the Canadian Medical Association revealed that “only one in five doctors have questioned. . . said they would be willing to perform euthanasia if the practice were legalized. . . Twice as many – 42 percent – ​​said they would refuse to do so” (Kirkey 1). Euthanasia is defined as giving a patient the right to die prematurely with the assistance of a physician, and legalization of the practice is being considered by lawmakers in many countries, including the United States. Therefore, 42 percent of doctors in Canada are on the right side of this debate. Euthanasia should not be legalized because it violates society's view that life is sacred, creates economic pressure on doctors, and for countries that have legalized it, their laws are not sufficiently specific to fully protect patients. many laws and social mores and the legalization of euthanasia devalue this protection. This idea was recently challenged at a trial in London when two severely disabled men claimed their protected human rights had been violated because they could not choose how and when to die. The British court ruled that although current laws did not support the rights claimed by the men, “the ban on euthanasia is justified” (Cheng 1). In this trial, the right to life prevailed over the so-called right to die because a law passed by the British people was protected. If the case had won, the laws that British voters approved to protect life would have been defeated. Similarly, in the United States, many bills promoting euthanasia died once voters were informed of the debate. Initiative 119, which would have legalized euthanasia in Washington in 1991, first shows... middle of paper... the beneficiaries of the interest in freedom here” (Smith 5). The Court's ruling on euthanasia is broad and non-specific, allowing euthanasia for "severely impaired" people, which, although claimed to benefit patients, could be applied to treatable conditions. Like existing laws and publicized savings information, proponents of euthanasia are not accurate and do not tell the full story of an issue that could cost lives and increase family trauma. . Even doctors in Canada argue that euthanasia is currently a tragedy of our world. Death should never be a prescription for ending a patient's life and this premise devalues ​​society's view of life. To avoid this continued travesty, citizens should be informed of the dangers that euthanasia laws pose to patients before a measure is submitted to lawmakers for approval..