Other advocates of voluntary euthanasia argue that it should be an option for an adult who is able and willing to make such a decision (autonomy). Middle Thus from this view point euthanasia shouldn't be legalised due to the risk of misinformation or a failure to comprehend the situation which would leave the patient vulnerable to a decision that he or she might not truly want to make.
There are also arguments against the legalisation of euthanasia due to the risk of mistake that may occur, as we can't be certain that they would be avoided.
The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (November 2006) urged health professionals to consider euthanasia for seriously disabled babies to spare the emotional burden of families bringing them up.
Critics of this are concerned that the example of actively killing a baby or withdrawing treatment to bring about death develops a culture in which all disabled people are considered to be of less value and thus dispute as to whether or not this should be legal.
After a terrible car accident in September 2000, Vincent Humbert, a young French quadriplegic, blind and mute, asks to the president the right to die, which was refused.
Confined to hospital bed and aware of the heartbreak it causes to his family and especially his mother, Mary, who watches over him tirelessly, Vincent expects only one thing: the deliverance that will put end his torment.
There are also four different kind of euthanasia; active, passive, voluntary and involuntary.
' Euthanasia is inducing a painless death, by agreement and with compassion, to ease suffering.
Therefore, in the legalisation of euthanasia, the diagnosis would have to be beyond a doubt and it is questionable about whether there can always be medical certainty about what the condition will entail and how long it will take to develop.
Thus, being an area of doubt that could lead to irreversible mistakes, euthanasia shouldn't be legalised to safeguard people against this.