Items
Details
Table of Contents
Introduction: history of the euthanasia debate
Point: states have a duty to protect life in all forms
Counterpoint: end-of-life decisions are personal matters
Point: without clear evidence of intent, life support should be administered
Counterpoint: the state should not intervene to keep people on life support
Point: state bans on physician-assisted suicide protect life
Counterpoint: state bans on physician-assisted suicide prolong suffering
Conclusion: the future of the euthanasia debate.
Point: states have a duty to protect life in all forms
Counterpoint: end-of-life decisions are personal matters
Point: without clear evidence of intent, life support should be administered
Counterpoint: the state should not intervene to keep people on life support
Point: state bans on physician-assisted suicide protect life
Counterpoint: state bans on physician-assisted suicide prolong suffering
Conclusion: the future of the euthanasia debate.