It seems counterintuitive that people declare euthenasia unethical to children. In Belgium, the extension of euthenasia to children was voted upon, resulting in 50 supports and 17 against the bill. Pro-lifers, who are generally catholic, disagree with the extension of euthenasia to minors. However, who is one to say when and how someone dies? If someone is in severe pain and there is nothing that can be done to stop that pain, a quick and easy death would be much more ethical than to extend that suffering. All, if not a great majority, would be saddened by the death of a young one, but they would be even more saddened by a suffering and helpless child. All citizens, despite age, should have the right over their body. If medically diagnosed that a child will continue to suffer for the rest of their lives, there should be a choice to end that suffering or not. This doesn’t mean that euthenasia should be mandatory, but it should be an option. A bill extending euthenasia to children would only be fair.
On the other hand, there are risks that come with such extension. In Belgium, 47% of assisted deaths are not reported. Further, 32% of assisted deaths are done without request. While euthenaisa should be an option, it must be done with approval from both the patient and the parents. Also, the option should be given after a complete diagnosis from the doctor. The statistics are frightening, but that just means that there must be more regulation on assisted deaths rather than denying the option all together.
It seems counterintuitive that men have the right to define and handle rape upon women. Since the beginning of history, rape has been taken under control by the male gender. For centuries, it was up to the man to decide if a woman was actually raped or not. In all circumstances, if anybody performs a sexual act without the approval of another, it is declared sexual assault or rape. There is nothing to consider in the situation, if the sexual action is done, it is legally a crime. Furthermore, it should not be up to the man to decide whether or not the woman was raped or what should happen as a result.
In 1780 B.C, rape was regarded as property damage. If a woman was raped, the woman was in the wrong and was labeled an adulteress. Her punishment would be death. In 1290, by the British, if a woman was raped and got pregnant, she wasn’t actually raped. The reason behind this is because a woman could not conceive if she was raped. In times of slavery, black women who were raped were not paid attention to. What happened to a black woman did not matter and the man would not be punished. There are countless examples in history where either the woman was punished for being raped or the woman was not at fault for being raped. This is unacceptable on all accounts and men should not be the ones to manage the aftermath.
It seems counterintuitive that humans make the call whether or not an animal is well enough to perform in circuses. Elephants require intensive care, but elephants in circus shows are not provided with such care. If an elephant is ill, the animal must be visited by a veterinarian and given the okay before going out to perform. However, humans will force animals into performing, even if the animal should not be, causing extreme pain and even death. For instance, one elephant was sick. While the owners should have called the veterinarian immediately, they held off. Once said elephant began bleeding and it was noticeable by others, the elephant finally got a visit with the veterinarian. After being told that the elephant needs time before performing, the owners ignored it and shortly after the elephant passed away. This type of care is unacceptable and unethical.
For years this type of behavior went unnoticed, but that time changed following that late 90s incident and more incidents began to be released. Animal rights organizations sought to put an end to these horrific acts. After years of denying such wrong acts, Kenneth Feld, owner who caused the death of multiple elephants, admitted to the abuse he partook in. This includes hitting with bullhooks, whipping, and using electric prods. Animals deserve better than this, and thanks to animal rights organizations, this behavior will be no longer.
An example of the power of a single word. You say:
Here the word that undermines your entire argument is CONSIDERED.
The whole point of your summary is to declare that RAPE can be accurately defined, and that it should not be vulnerable to what men CONSIDER rape to be. So, when you say in the middle of your paragraph:
readers rightly wonder who is doing the considering?
What you MEAN is:
I appreciate that you approve of my recommendation, RowanRat, but adopting the change to the word “considered” without making any other revisions to any of your three summaries does not qualify for a Regrade. (Maybe you misunderstand what the Regrade opportunity means.)