I could use some help getting started with my causal argument. I am researching the pros and cons of euthanasia and how the terms in which euthanasia should be used or is granted to a patient as an option. From my hypothesis, and the research from my white paper, I have gathered that the two areas in which euthanasia is argued the most. Here is what I have gathered. Euthanasia is argued the most when children are involved, and the second being when a patient either underage and or over the age of eighteen is suffering from personal issues such as depression and anxiety asks to be euthanized.
Also the cause of euthanasia being a result in a patience life could be two of many options. The first being a person who is suffering from a terminal disease that has yet to be cured or the state of someones mental health can heavily effect their decision to be euthanized if the patient has thoughts of suicide, has chronic depression, and a unhealthy level of anxiety. In Belgium, it has been argued that standards must be set, especially when children are involved in order to consider euthanasia, but the con of this solutions suggests that doctors and state legislators should not determine who’s life is worth living. Causal questions would include, who decides when a life should be taken? Does a child have say in the decision making for euthanasia? What other alternatives can be used to help those who suffer mental disadvantages not consider euthanasia? Should euthanasia be legalized in America and other countries around the world? What are the standards or qualifications that will approve someone to complete the operation?