Response Essay of Euthanasia

Fajar Wimar Ramadhan

16015146
FMIPA K03
DISAGREE WITH EUTHANASIA
According to the article Euthanasia an Assisted Suicide, Its Murder In
First Degree, written by Autumn Buzzel, on November 22, 1999, euthanasia is a
way of ending the life of a person who was ill by injecting lethal liquid.
Euthanasia actually is not normal and ethical. Euthanasia is not a natural cause of
death, instead it is murder and should not be allowed. Religion and several
cultures had already banned it. The task of the doctor is supposed to help people,
but in this case the doctor kills people for reason of compassion. Murder should
be prosecuted legally. The doctor must improve their morale, and put the patient's
health at the top in the healing procedure. Ethunasia case happens because family
who feel burdened, not because of severe disease. Country should ensure that life
is more crucial than the choice to die to its citizens. Thus, I support with the writer
oppinion. I disagree with euthanasia because it is contrary to the Law of the
nation, as well as physician's role.
The first reason, euthanasia is contrary to the Law of the nation. We should
realize that euthanasia should not be done. This is because law in our country
prohibits the ractice of euthanasia. In one of the article, it is said that although not
explained very deeply, euthanasia is still considered as breaking the criminal code.
Criminal law expert from Padjadjaran University, Komariah Emong, argues that
the draft Penal ("Criminal Code") regulates the ban on euthanasia, namely Article
344 Criminal Code which reads, "Whoever robs life of another person at the
request of the person himself who clearly expressed with sincerity, punishable by
a maximum imprisonment of twelve years" (Diana; 2011). Although the Criminal
Code does not explicitly mention the word euthanasia, however, based on Article
344 Criminal Code, doctors should refuse to perform actions to take the life, even
if the patient's family wants. According to her argument, and the law of the nation,
euthanasia is not allowed.
The seccond reason, euthanasia is also contrary to the physician's role.
Euthanasia should not be done by a doctor based on the request of anyone. If
doctors do this, then the role of the doctor to cure the patient lost. If many doctors
practice euthanasia, there will be few people trust the doctor. Based on the
medical ethic agreed by Indonesian medical association, a doctor is not allowed to
perform abortion (abortion provocatus) and ending the life of a patient, who,
according to the knowledge and experience, will not be possible to recover again.
Beside from that, Islamic medical ethics agreed by the first International
Conference of Islamic Medical states that active euthanasia as well as suicide is
unjustified. The doctor`s code of conduct is already clear to show what the duties

of a doctor. Therefore, a physician must exert all his cleverness and ability to
alleviate suffering and maintain human life (patient), not to end it.
Some people may say that medical knowledge can estimate the success of
medical action to cure the patients. If there is no possibility to recover eventhough
the best medical action has been taken, are people allowed to perform
euthanasia? We must consider the fact that nothing is impossible. This,
sometimes, occurs in the case when people, who are medically unable to be
treated, are saved from the death. The example is Agiani Isna Nauli, 33 years old.
A request to do euthanasia on October 22, 2004 has been filed by a man named
Hassan Kusuma because he did not bear to see his wife named Agiani Isna Nauli,
lay in a coma for two months and did not able any longer to provide the fund for
recovery. This request to do euthanasia was submitted to the Central Jakarta
District Court. This case is one example of euthanasia beyond the wishes of the
patient. This request was finally rejected by the Central Jakarta District Court, and
after undergoing intensive treatment, the final condition of the patient (January 7,
2005) has made progress in the recovery of her health. From this case, we can
learn a morale lesson. Humans are more valuable than material. Then, doing
euthanasia in order for the sake of financial, is not morally justified.
In conclusion, euthanasia is an act that must be stopped and can not be
tolerated under any circumstances. This is because euthanasia is contrary to the
law nation and contrary to the role of the doctor. Thus, there is no any reason for
saying that euthanasia can be done by the sick people.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Kusumasari, Diana. Apakah Rumah Sakit Wajib Bertanggung Jawab Jika Pasien
Kabur?. Klinik Hukum. 8 April 2016. Hukum Online. 30 March
2016.
Laksono, Wahyu Tri. Tuntutan Ryan dan Soal Kebijakan Eutanasia di Indonesia.
National Geographic. 5 Agust 2014. National Geographic Indonesia.
30 March 2016.
Rahmat, Wilta Aulia. Hukum Euthanasia Menurut Islam. Aul al Ghifary. 11
October 2011. Pendidikan Islam. 30 March 2016.
Triantoro, Dani. Pro Dan Kontra Euthanisia. Dani201211222. 30 Agust 2011.
Esaunggul. 30 March 2016.