Mercy killing should not be advocated in China

高考英语作文：ShouldEuthanasiaBeLegalize实用1份高考英语作文：Should Euthanasia Be Legalize 1Euthanasia, a quiet and easy death, or “mercy killing” as we call it recently has made theheadlines frequently. Many people applaud it and argue that euthanasia should be legalized.As is pointed out, to practise euthanasia can benefit both the patient and his family. To aterminally ill person who is suffering excruciating pains day and night or living “like a vegetable”, to be allowed to end his life painlessly is a good release. To his family it is also a big relief considering the financial and emotional drain on them that having to sustain his lifeentails. However, the legalization of euthanasia may also bring with it problems our society has not previously faced. Is it humane, for example, that a terminally ill patient is thus caused to feelguilty for remaining alive because he does not want to die? Is it wise that a patient is killed alive simply because of a mistaken terminal diagnosis? And is it possible that euthanasia could be taken advantage of for some ulterior or even criminal purposes?Since the legalization of euthanasia will raise serious moral and social issues, the decision our society makes about euthanasia will undoubtedlyhave tremendous consequences in society.。

Mercy KillingMercy killing is one of the most controversial issues in the world of medicine. Mercy killing for the patients themselves, is a way to reduce human suffering. So many people think mercy killing should be legalized.I don’t agree with them.I oppose the performing of mercy killing mainly for four reasons.First, some sufferers, especially those in poverty, choose mercy killing just because they do not want the family to get involved into financial problems. As their family members, should we give up and see the one who are intimate to us die in desperate? The answer is of course not. What we should do is just to back them and encourage them.Second, if mercy killing is permitted, then some doctors may just give up the efforts to save the sufferer and abandon the patients to mercy killing, which may insult the essence and mission of the doctor.Third, in order to get the estates of the patients, the relatives of the sufferer and the doctor may take advantage of mercy killing to murder the patients.Fourth, life is given to us only once, thus, no one should be denied the right to die.As to the legality of mercy killing, different people may have different opinions. But we should always believe that medical problems today may be solved tomorrow. So the sufferer should not be given up. As long as we have confidence, then everything is possible. Besides, mercy killing is to some extent against the ethics and is not widely accepted. So, mercy killing should be made illegal.ID No:12116322Student:Hu Weigang(William)。

反对安乐死的英语作文Euthanasia, often referred to as "mercy killing," is a contentious issue that has sparked vigorous debate across the globe. While some argue that it is a compassionate choice for those suffering from incurable conditions, others vehemently oppose it on ethical, legal, and philosophical grounds. This essay aims to explore the reasons why euthanasia should not be accepted as a form of end-of-life care.Firstly, the ethical considerations surrounding euthanasia are profound. The Hippocratic Oath, a foundational principle in medical ethics, instructs doctors to "do no harm." By performing euthanasia, medical professionals would bedirectly contravening this principle, which could fundamentally alter the doctor-patient relationship. Patients must be able to trust that their doctors will work towards their well-being and not hasten their death.Secondly, the legal implications of euthanizing patients are complex. Legalizing euthanasia could lead to a slippery slope where the criteria for who qualifies for euthanasia become increasingly broad. This could potentially open the door to abuse, with vulnerable individuals being pressured into choosing euthanasia against their true wishes, or even without their knowledge.Moreover, the concept of euthanasia challenges the very definition of human dignity. Human life is consideredintrinsically valuable, and the act of euthanasia can be seen as devaluing that life by treating it as something that can be terminated at will. This perspective can have far-reaching consequences on how society views the sanctity of life and the worth of individuals suffering from severe illnesses.Additionally, the medical community is continually advancing, with new treatments and therapies being developed that can alleviate suffering and extend life. By choosing euthanasia, patients may be forgoing the opportunity to benefit from future medical breakthroughs that could improve their quality of life or even offer a cure.Furthermore, the emotional and psychological impact on the family and friends of the person undergoing euthanasia cannot be ignored. The grief and potential guilt associated with the loss of a loved one in such a manner can be overwhelming and long-lasting.Lastly, there are alternative approaches to managing end-of-life care that should be explored before resorting to euthanasia. Palliative care, for instance, focuses on providing relief from the symptoms and stress of serious illnesses, aiming to improve the quality of life for both the patient and their family. This approach respects thepatient's life while managing their physical and emotional needs without resorting to ending life.In conclusion, while the debate on euthanasia is nuanced and deeply personal, the arguments against it are compelling. The ethical, legal, and emotional complexities, coupled with thepotential for abuse and the advancement of palliative care, make a strong case for continuing to oppose euthanasia as a solution to end-of-life suffering.。

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and gentlemen, our prime Minister and members of Government side, as the member of opposition I would like to present my argumentation which is divided into three parts: rebuttal, statement and conclusion.At first, I’d like to reiterate our team line, that this house believes terminally ill people should not have the choice to end their own life. There are another two aspects to support our team line. We definitely believe that terminally ill people haven’t consider about the feelings of their family members and friends who still have the hope of curing. And the passive thoughts of mercy killing also have a negative influence on society.In the first part of my speech I would like to make my rebuttal.As the number 3 of the government said, mercy killing has already been practiced peacefully by many developed countries and we should learn from these countries. However according to the national situation, legislative environment, and culture convention in China, euthanasia do not have the feasibility of implementation. Because of our country’s economics and politics, there is limitation of the level of medical research. And the basic problem of euthanasia and standards of judgment can not reach an agreement. From the microscopic point of view, the euthanasia have relation with the patients, medical staff, family members of patients and medical institutions this four beneficial sides, there is existence ofsecurity risks to implement euthanasia. So it will be a long time for euthanasia to have the feasibility of implementation in our country.Now I’d like to provide my statement.For the first aspect, terminally ill people haven’t consider about the feelings of their family members and friends who still have the hope of curing. As for terminally ill people, a substantial proportion of them suffer a lot from the incurable illness such like cancer. They are too easy to think about death when they are overwhelmed by depression, pain, and fear. And they want to have the choice to end their own life. However, have they ever consider about the feelings of their family members and friends ? They will be so painful and disappointed. Maybe someone will put the blame on themselves because they think it’s their inability that murder their beloved one. It may cause enormous and incurable pain which will accompanies them for most of their life time.Zhang Youbo is a student who comes from a poor family. When he told his parents that he was admitted to the NanJing University, his terminally ill mother committed suicide because she didn’t want to be a burden to the family. Zhang felt so guilty and said it was him who made his mother die. Maybe the death of his mother will release the burden of the family but the wound in his heart can never be healed.According to the example, for family and friends, no matter how long the patients can stay with them, they will never give up their life. Sothe patients cannot be so selfish and only consider about their own feelings. The pain of the body should not become the reason to choose death, because mercy killing is the pain for the whole family, and it is just the reason to escape from the responsibility. The terminally ill people can not have choice to end their own life because they are so closely connected to others.For the second aspect, the passive thought of mercy killing has a negative influence on society which will blocks the development of human beings.First of all, if the society accept euthanasia, it may give a excuse for children to escape from the obligation of supporting the elders. Maybe it will even open a door for murdering for money. Some individual medical staff also may cover up some medical accidents on behalf of euthanasia.As the Columbia Weekly muckraked the shady deal of the euthanasia that many doctors and relatives together manipulate the elderly and patients’ life, a large number of old people in Holland fled to Germany for fear of being put to death before they die naturally. So the side effect of euthanasia can really cause great panic in our society.Secondly, if the idea of euthanasia becomes the universal values, once people have the thought of the unbearable pressure or pain, they will never think about survival and hope. They will kill this idea and make the negative mercy killing widespread and without engagement. Humanisticcare, social responsibility will gradually fade away. And culture construction will fall into the degraded abyss. Pessimistic psychology not only erodes people’s thoughts but also brings a serious panic to the society.As French newspaper recently disclosed, the number of the people who choose euthanasia increases at a phenomenal rate in Belgium. In 2013, the number of the dead who received mercy killing was increased to 1816 as there was only 1432 in 2012. So according to the data, with the implementation of the euthanasia, more and more people do not have the spirit to fight against the illness and just give up themselves so easily.But we may think that society can not just say no to the euthanasia but also it should do something for the patients. Because there are so many people choose death because of lacking care and love. Without thinking about survival, terminally ill girl Li Yan asked for mercy killing not because of the unbearable pain just because she was afraid of being disgusted. She didn’t refuse the sunshine of life, but the society lack of caring for them. So, please cherish your precious life, and please give patients more care.In conclusion, terminally ill people haven’t consider about the feelings of their family members and friends who still have the hope of curing when they choose mercy killing. And the passive thought of mercy killing has a negative influence on society which will blocks thedevelopment of human beings. What’s more, the society is supposed to offer more care and love to this patients.So I maintain that terminally ill people should not have the choice to end their own life.。

安乐死的争议The Debate of EuthanasiaAs the development of human society, people emphasis much on their rights, they believe that everyone has the right to choose what they want if it is not against the law. The issue of euthanasia has been a hot topic these years, some agree it in that people have the right to end their suffering, others disagree because they think life is precious, no one can take away one’s life. Now the debate is still going on.随着人类社会的发展，人们十分注重自己的权利，认为每个人都有权利选择自己想要的，如果不违法的话。

安乐死的问题在这些年成为了热门话题，一些人赞同，因为人们有权利结束痛苦，一些人不赞同，因为他们觉得生命是很宝贵的，没有人能结束别人的生命。

现在争议仍在继续。

On the one hand, euthanasia is admitted by some people, they think the patients have the right to end their agony. The patients who are diagnosed with cancer and there is no way for them to cure, they can choose to end their life peacefully. 一方面，安乐死得到了一些人的承认，他们觉得病人有权利结束痛苦。

8月23日英语考试一、词汇（完型填空）：共10分，10题P31、P53、P90、P133、P182二、单选（书后4个TEST SECTION A，共95个）：共10分P289开始三、阅读理解（书后4个TEST中的20篇阅读理解）：共40分，20题P293开始四、英译汉：共15分见附一五、汉译英：共15分见附二六、作文：共10分TEST ONE：P302页，三选一TEST TWO：P317页，老师没提TEST THREE：P337页，2和3TEST FOUR：P354页，C附一：汉译英1.不少病入膏肓者为了求得解脱往往要求医生使用致命药物;也有一些病人家属觉得彻底治愈病人已经无望,因此要求医生不要对病人再进行保命式的治疗.最近,"安乐死”这一问题在欧洲国家已酿成一场激烈的大争论.1. Quite a few terminally ill patients would often like their doctors to administer lethal drugs to them to be relieved of suffering; there are also some of their families who would prefer that doctors withdraw any life-prolonging treatment since there is no hope of effecting an ultimate cure. This problem has lately boiled into a fierce public debate in some European countries.2.人们对“安乐死”可能被人滥用,或不必要使用的担心不无道理,但只要政府和有关方面措施得力,医院严格控制,这个问题最终或许可以得到解决.2. The fear that …mercy killing‟ will be abused or used unnecessarily is not groundless. But with effective measures rigorously taken by the government and the departments concerned, and under tightly controlled conditions in hospitals, this problem would most probably be resolved in the end.3.我们这么冒险尝试，无非是为了与自己或与命运堵一把，并从中实现自我之价值。

Unit 21.On the average of six times a day,a doctor in Holland practices“active”euthanasia:intentionally administering a lethal drug to a terminally ill patient who has asked to be relieved of suffering. Twenty times a day, life-prolonging treatment is withheld or withdrawn when there is no hope that it can effect an ultimate cure.荷兰的医生平均每天6次实施“主动”安乐死：即有意提供给要求从痛苦中得以解脱的晚期病人致命药物。

当彻底治愈病人已经无望，（医生）将不再对病人进行保命式治疗，这样的情况一天有20次。

2.The long simmering euthanasia issue has lately boiled over into a sometimes fierce public debate, with both sides claiming the mantle of ultimate righteousness.争论了很久的“安乐死”问题最近时不时地演变成激烈的公众大争论，双方都声称自己的事业是最终的正义。

3.And so the euthanasists have begun to press their case with greaterforce.They argue that every human being should have the right to “die with dignity”, by which they usually meanthe right to escape the horrors of a painful or degrading hospitalization.因此，安乐死提倡者们已开始积极主张他们的观点。