Essay about The Criminal Justice System - 753 Words

The Criminal Justice System The Criminal Justice System is one of the most important tools available to society for the control of anti-social behavior. The criminal justice system needs to prove a balance between punishing the guilty and protecting the innocent being found guilty; however it is not as easy to convict those who are guilty of committing crimes. There have been many miscarriages to justice where innocent people were sent to prison. Many people have been affected by crime, this is due to statistics, which show the various number of crimes committed in particular areas. Crime statistics are compiled differently by different forces which is notoriously unreliable. There are two†¦show more content†¦Under the new rules, officers must record a crime anything that is reported as a crime. In the past, if an officer thought that someone was lying (hoping for compensation perhaps) or thought that the crime was not as major as murder for example, then he or she did not nee to record it. If the Government do succeed in the new system of compiling statistics then crime statistics may become increasingly reliable. This is because all crime is recorded, no matter how big or small the crime is. However the statistics may not necessarily be entirely true, as many people may not report their crime to the police. The majority of the crime not being reported is due to the fear within oneself, or victims may not think that the crime they have been involved in was minor. Victims who are scared are more likely to be those involved in domestic violence or ot her sort of abuse. If there was a couple, and the husband regularly abused his wife, the wife would get scared to report this to the police as she may believe that if her husband find out then he will take revenge and might abuse her even more which may sometimes lead to extents such as murder. Or there maybe cases where teenagers have been abused by bullies in school. They might be frightened to tell an adult, let alone the police asShow MoreRelatedJustice Systems And The Criminal Justice System Essay1248 Words   |  5 PagesThe criminal justice system is a complex and often uncoordinated system that operates by enforcing the law and seeking justice across countless jurisdictions. It is comprised of many separate agencies including agencies at the federal, state, and local level. Each agency has its own function and goals while operating at different levels of government. The agencies also represent different concerns and values of the public, creating a fragmented system rather than a monolithic, unified system. A monolithicRead MoreCriminal Justice System1524 Words   |  7 Pagesfor the Criminal Justice System is to reduce the crime and the fire of crime. In order to achieve this it is using different agencies and the major of them are the Police, Prosecution, Courts, Prisons and Probation. They all are operating in synchrony for achieving their legal responsibilities and particularly for reducing the level of crime. The aim of this essay specifically is to discuss the functions of the police and how they actually fit with the objectives of the Criminal Justice System as aRead MoreThe Criminal Justice System1308 Words   |  5 Pagesï » ¿Criminal Justice System The criminal justice system refers to the way in which a society chooses to handle all aspects of crime and punishment. In the Western world, particularly the United States, the criminal justice system is an official governmental system that focuses on crime and punishment, though some societies still incorporate a significant amount of informal social controls into their criminal justice systems. The criminal justice system covers everything from crime-prevention andRead MoreThe On The Criminal Justice System984 Words   |  4 PagesGarland (2001), view on â€Å"the criminal justice system in America was created to keep communities safe, to respect and restore victims, and to return offenders who leave prison to be self-sufficient and law-abiding. Treatment simply did not work either by therapy or broader social programs and became is a monumental failure that our states and nation can no longer afford† (p.61) Garland (2001) stated â€Å"that the collapse of faith in our correction system began a wave of demoralization that underminedRead MoreThe Criminal Justice System1667 Words   |  7 PagesThe criminal justice system has for long been faced by a lot of caseloads, an issue which has been heaping a lot of pressure on the stakeholders.  Ã‚  The cause of increased workload is lack of adequate resources to deal with the caseload. Some people have argued that the only way to deal with the overloads is to provide more money to the criminal justice systems so that everyone involved will be able to do the required tasks and in so doing reduce the number of cases while scholars think that the onlyRead MoreThe Criminal Justice System720 Words   |  3 Pages Victims usually adopt a subsidiary role in the courts, compared to the accused or offender (Booth, 2016). Victim-focused law reforms are open to many jurisdictions throughout Australia, and majority of systems which follow the adversarial nature of proceedings (Garkawe, 2007). The justice system aims to enforce a therapeutic structure, however, in some instances this fails to be upheld for the victim. In a sentencing hearing, an offender’s mitigating factors may reduce their sentence, thereforeRead MoreCriminal Justice System1308 Words   |  6 PagesNorways criminal justice system is doing something right. The few citizens that go to prison usually only go once. How does Norway achieve this? The country relies on a method called restorative justice, which aims to repair the harm caused by crime rather than punish people. This system is purely focused on rehabilitating prisoners. The United States, on the other hand, places focus on incarceration and incapacitation. This is w here the methodologies clash: should the criminal justice system be responsibleRead MoreThe Criminal Justice System1597 Words   |  7 PagesThe purpose of the criminal justice system is explained by three definitions: Control crime, Prevent crime, and provide and maintain justice. This sense of criminal justice has been the same since pre-civilized communities, where the elders of a tribe enforced the laws of the village. The criminal justice system has changed drastically from the times of kinship systems to today’s system of laws. As time has passed criminal justice has change in many ways, for example: the way they dress, arrest,Read MoreThe Criminal Justice System1454 Words   |  6 Pages Our Criminal Justice System is far from perfect but it has fulfilled its design by becoming a living system so to speak. Our system is predicated upon discretion from start to finish whereas the first step in the process lies with the contacting officer. Once lawful presence has been established and probable cause for contact can be clearly articulated, the decision to make that contact rests solely with that officer. Of course, each department utilizes a form of controlled discretion, ensuringRead MoreThe Criminal Justice System1305 Words   |  6 PagesThroughout this course, I have learned about the many segments of the criminal justice system. The criminal justice system is made up of three main elements which process a case from initiation, through trial, to punishment. First a case starts with law enforcement officials, who investigate crime and gather evidence to identify and use against the assumed suspect. The case then proceeds to the court system, which evaluates the evid ence to decide if the defendant is guilty or innocent. If the defendant

Alfred Marshall The Father Of Standard Microeconomics

Alfred Marshall: The Father of Standard Microeconomics Today, in our society, everything is handled with small green papers that are called â€Å"dollars†, and people give ridiculous amounts of value to this meager resource. Money can get someone a gargantuan mansion, a lustrous limousine, and many other commodities others can only dream about. In a sense, a person can buy their life and everything within it. Without money, a person cannot have access to basic facilities or live a comfortable life, and society looks down on them, recognizing them as â€Å"money-wasters† or â€Å"homeless people†. However, if it weren’t for one person, the world of economics would be very different from what it is now. This man wrote various books that helped people in the past see what economics is about and how to deal with it and saw the world of money very differently from what people see today. He also created the curve that illustrated two terms that he created: consumer surplus and producer surplus. He is Alfred Marshall , one of the most influential economists ever. According to Robert Palasik, Alfred Marshall was one of the most prominent economists of the Marginal Revolution, where economists began to think about marginal utility and approached mathematics more easily (Palasik). During his lifetime, he created various tools that would aid the economy during those times and in the distant future. Some of them were his books titled Economics of Industry. These books, mainly written by Marshall’sShow MoreRelatedAlfred Marshall And His Contributions839 Words   |  4 PagesAlfred Marshall was born on July 26, 1842, in London, England. He was raised by his father William Marshall, a cashier at a bank in England and his mother, Rebecca Oliver. He also had four siblings: Charles William Marshall, Walter Marshall, Agnes Marshall, and Mabel Marshall. His family was middle class who encouraged Alfred to be a clergyman. His father strongly encouraged him to attend Oxford University when Alfred received a scholarship; however, he attended St. John ’s College against his father’sRead MoreInternship Report on Milkvita14316 Words   |  58 PagesMarket Economy Adam Smith (1723-1790), the ‘father of modern economics’ and author of the famous book ‘An inquiry into the Nature and causes of the wealth of Nations’ spawned the discipline of economics by trying to understand why some nations prospered while other lagged behind in poverty. Others after him also explored how a nation’s allocation of resources affects its wealth. The definition set out at the turn of twentieth century by Alfred Marshall, author of ‘The principles of Economics’ reflectsRead MoreManagement Challenges for the 21st Century.Pdf60639 Words   |  243 Pagesdiscipline—with its own university departments, its own terminology, its own career ladder. At the same time—and for the same reason—what had begun as a study of management in the rapidly growing hospital (e.g., by Raymond Sloan, the younger brother of GM’s Alfred Sloan) was split off as a separate discipline and christened â€Å"Hospital Adm inistration.† Not to be called â€Å"management† was, in other words, â€Å"political correctness† in the Depression years. In the postwar period, however, the fashion turned. By 1950Read MoreContemporary Issues in Management Accounting211377 Words   |  846 Pagesunderstandings of both conceptual and practical issues, in recent years providing a voice of reason amidst all the consultancy excitement of seemingly new ways of costing the business world. He has played a similar role in the area of accounting standard setting, both taking forward the British tradition of the economic analysis of financial accounting and, of possibly greater significance, providing some very original analyses of the possibilities for meaningful accounting standardization. With

Summary Response Discrimination Free Essays

JUST WALK ON BY Have you ever been obsessed by the fear of being different from other people? People usually give the wrong perception on the others based on their appearance, or their skin. In the article â€Å"Just Walk on by†, the author Brent Staples tells a story about his own experiences, which are how he was discriminated because of his appearance: a black man. We will write a custom essay sample on Summary Response: Discrimination or any similar topic only for you Order Now The story begins when the author was mistaken for a criminal due to his black skin by a white woman. Although Brent Staples was just a graduate student, every time he went to the public, almost everybody, especially the women tried to run away from him. Simply, he is black, and they considered that a black man could be a rapist, a mugger or worse. The readers can picture how a young black man is isolated from the public through the author’s experiences: being perceived as dangerous on the street, or being mistaken for a burglar at work. At the end, he found out that he was not able to change the bad perception on his black skin, so he learnt to get use to it and tried to be successful. In response to the essay, there are three points that crossed my mind after read the article; specifically, these are the discrimination, the compassion and ways to get over the obstacles. Related essay: On Compassion Summary To begin with, discrimination is the first issue which was pointed out very clearly in the article. Discrimination has lasted for many decades. There are many kinds of discrimination, such as skin colour, religion, national origin, and gender. Although many laws, controversies, demonstrations have exploded to against the discrimination, a lot of people are still suffering from that issue. The victims often receive the bad perceptions of the others on their own appearances, and as the results, they are not trusted by anybody or even be considered as a criminal, and worse for the society. For example, the author was mistaken for a burglar at his workplace just because he is the black. He finally chose trying to be successful as a way to overcome the discrimination. However, how many people who are discriminated can be optimistic to get over their obstacles as Brent Staples did? The victims of discrimination usually feel stressed, depressed, and insulted, so it’s very hard to think of a positive way to overcome it. Some of them choose to suicide or kill any people who hurt them. Obviously, they become worse as a result of discrimination. When we were born, nobody was able to choose our parents, skin colour or gender, so we have no rights to evaluate or give any poor perception on other people based on their appearance. Another point that I want to share after reading the article is the compassion. Being discriminated by other people is the worst feeling in the world. As a person who comes from a poor country, I am often affair of being discriminated. I’m not black, but some people gave me the bad perception because they thought that I come from a poor country which means I have a poor education. Everything I have is worse than theirs. Moreover, I used to be discriminated by a Vietnamese who was born in the America. He usually makes fun of me because I’m not good in English. As the results, I’m often reluctant and feel shy when talking with a stranger in English. Back to the article, the author’s story about discrimination reminds me of a poem I read many years ago: COLOURED When I born, I Black, When I grow up, I Black, When I go in Sun, I Black, When I scared, I Black, When I sick, I Black, And when I die, I still black, And you White fella, When you born, you Pink, When you grow up, you White, When you go in Sun, you Red, When you cold, you Blue, When you scared, you Yellow, When you sick, you Green, And when you die, you Gray, And you calling me Coloured ? This poem was written by an African child. Eventually, discrimination exists everywhere in the world. The black is usually distrusted in both workplaces and society. In Brent Staples’ story, even though he had a good job in Chicago, he was still considered as a burglar. Not all coloured people are bad and aggressive, and not all the white are good. Therefore, as coloured people, we should show the talents and prove our values to the world that everything white people do, we can do it, and even better. The final thing i learnt from the article is the ways to get over the discrimination. I really admire Brent’s spirit when he faced to his obstacles. He chose to avoid misunderstandings and tried to be successful as ways to against discrimination. Actually, in life, we can see a lot of coloured people who used to be discriminated proved their own values to the world. For example, Michael Jackson, Whitney Houston, Mariah Carey and many other celebrities have showed their talents and been admitted by the millions people in the world. Plus, recently, Barack Obama is the first coloured president of America. Nevertheless, beside positive sides, there are some people choosing negative ways to overcome the discrimination. They suicide as a way to escape, or they kill anybody who hurts them. Sometimes, being friendly and optimistic is a good way to solve problems rather than being aggressive and pessimistic. Our skin colour doesn’t make any senses; the way we perceive and get over our obstacles will make our own values. In conclusion, I’m strongly against the discrimination, but I also sympathize with the author in the article, and I admire the ways he chose to get over the discrimination. There should have more laws and organizations to support and protect people who are discriminated. Moreover, nobody have rights to evaluate or comment, especially discriminate other people based on their appearances. This world might be peaceful and happy if everyone lived by such tenets as â€Å"Never cause discrimination between human and human†. How to cite Summary Response: Discrimination, Essay examples

Moral and Ethical Problems of Euthanasia free essay sample

In the USA, the drama that was watched by many countries came to an end. On March 31, in a hospice in the state of Florida, Terri Schiavo died. She was in a coma for 15 years, because of an irreversible defect of the brain. Her husband said Terri did not want to live in a helpless condition, and through courts he achieved that the patient be disconnected from a life-support system (Wikipidia). PINELLAS PARK, Fla. With her husband and parents feuding to the bitter end and beyond, Terri Schiavo died Thursday, 13 days after her feeding tube was removed in a wrenching right-to-die dispute that engulfed the courts, Capitol Hill and the White House and divided the country. Cradled by her husband, Schiavo, 41, died a calm, peaceful and gentle death at about 9 a. m. , a stuffed animal under her arm, flowers arranged around her hospice room, said George Felos, Michael Schiavos attorney (Chachere). Before thinking about questions concerning euthanasia, I would like to say some words about general problems in medicine, from the moment it started, till now days of technical progress, undoubtedly, captured medicine. The basic task of medicine is a treatment of the patient and easing his/her suffering. During the hundreds of years till now, millions of physicians from different nationalities and creeds engaged in these noble actions. Graduating from medical schools, they all give a Hippocratic Oath and follow it in their work. There are a lot of sick people, and there are a lot of diseases. Among those diseases, there are absolutely easy, or very acute, and sometimes incurable deceases. But the medical science developing from year to year achieves enormous successes, and what seemed inconceivable yesterday becomes real today. Recently, many forms of oncological diseases were considered cureless, but now people who are suffering from those diseases are free from them, because of achievements of medicine and pharmacology. The problem of euthanasia has arisen not today and not suddenly. The chronology begins in extreme antiquity, and already then it caused numerous disputes among physicians, lawyers, philosophers and so on. The attitude to deliberately accelerate the approach of death, even with the purpose of the termination of the patient’s suffering, never was unequivocal. â€Å"Francis Bacon (1561~1626) who was an English philosopher said, A doctor has two duties consisting of restoring a patients health and reducing a patients suffering, and used the term euthanasia (from greek euthanasia, eu it is good, thanatos death). This term means a beautiful, favorable and peaceful death, so it sounds soft and gentle† (Kudo). Though the idea of euthanasia has been long debated, since of Hippocrates’ time and till now traditional medical ethics include an interdiction: I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect(Hippocratic Oath). However, since recent time, doctors in increasing frequency have a readiness to resort to this practice, at least when the patient himself/herself asks for death. How should we react to this tendency? Is it a clearing of out-of-date interdictions or it is a certain permissiveness, which is simultaneously incorrect from the moral point of view and is dangerous in practice? It is necessary to say that the term euthanasia complicates unequivocal interpretation and it causes a terminological mess. Approach to the problem of euthanasia changes with changing definitions of the term. â€Å"There are various kinds of euthanasia, such as active and passive euthanasia. There can be euthanasia in cases where we are certain the person does not want to die (involuntary euthanasia) and in cases where we are certain he does want to die (voluntary euthanasia). There can also be euthanasia where here is a doubt whether the person wishes to die or not (nonvoluntary euthanasia)† (Russel 278) Passive euthanasia is expressed when the medical aid directed on life prolongation is stopped, accelerating the approach of natural death (a good example of it could be the Terri Schavo case). Active euthanasia means using any medicinal or other means or other actions to cause painless death. â€Å"It [Euthanasia] is considered active if death is deliberately caused through such direct means as administering a lethal injection. It is considered passive if death is deliberately hastened by the omission of actions that might have prolonged life, such as performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation when cardiac arrest occurs, or administering antibiotics to combat acute infection†(Warren186). Active euthanasia can be in the following forms: 1. Euthanasia committed out of mercy occurs when relatives or the doctor, seeing painful sufferings of a hopeless sick person, and being unable to help him/her, inject or enter a super dose of an anesthetizing drug, therefore there comes fast and painless death. The question on the consent of the patient in this case is not put at all, as he/she is not capable of expressing his/her will. 2. The second form of active euthanasia is physician-assisted suicide, occurs with the consent of the patient, the doctor only helps him/her to commit suicide. . The third form is actually suicide occurs without the help of the doctor. The patient himself/herself uses the device, which leads him/her to fast and painless death, simple suicide. (Warren 187-200) We talk about euthanasia only when we deal with deliberate murder. In one case the life of a hopeless, fatally sick person is taken away in order to relieve him/her of superfluous sufferings or by means of direct intervention like lethal injection, or having left him/her to die by stopping to feed the patient( as in the Terry Schiavo case). In the other case of a newborn child with heavy physical defects, the parent of such child could be spared the pain of watching their child suffer â€Å"In 1938 the newly born infant of a family named Knauer served as the pretext for Hitler to set in motion the program of euthanasia he had intended to institute. The Knauer baby, sex unknown, was apparently born with severe handicaps. The exact nature of its affliction cannot be reconstructed with certainty, but testimony does seem to agree that it was born with a leg and part of an arm missing. Some evidence suggests that it was also blind, and the physicians also diagnosed it as an â€Å"idiot. † But its blindness was not noted by all observers, and the diagnosis â€Å"idiot† was not definite. In addition, the baby apparently suffered from convulsions† (Friedlander 39). There kinds of cases show euthanasia to be intentional; the intentional taking of lives that could be sustained through life-support technology. We speak about euthanasia only when there is an intention to put an end to a life of the patientor to speed up his/her death. We don’t speak about euthanasia when trying to facilitate the suffering of any person who is in the last stages of terminal illness, appointing him/her medicines which in only indirect ways can speed up the physiological process of dying. In this case, the purpose is not to help the patient die, but try to reduce his/her pain by means of preparations which only as a by-product are capable of speedy the approach to the end The death here is not provoked purposely, but is a possible consequence of anesthetizing therapy. It is possible to put euthanasia in a line of various medical methods: )Euthanasia is present at hat case when the preparation causes death and also if the patient is deprived of all that is necessary for his/her life (oxygen or food), or all that is good for him/her (intensive care units, where the patient can get better and life without life-support equipments, or such treatment, which will improve the patient health conditions) 2) Euthanasia is not present in a case when such treatment stops which would have adverse effect on the patient, for example, treatment that only would prolong a life in inhumane conditions; 3) Euthanasia is not present in cases of the discontinuance of life support when the condition of cerebral death is irreversible. Any treatment that does not facilitate suffering, does not give any chance of further recovery, but only continues agony and brings intolerable suffering to family and disproportionate charges to the state; 4) Euthanasia is not present in a case of badly degenerated newborn child, or in a heavy pathological case, if it is terminal when it is only artificial it is possible to continue a life, without hope for improvement and for reoccurrence of independent existence; Euthanasia is not present if the fatally ill patient was allowed to die naturally. It is possible only in a case when any therapy would allow prolonging a life only for a short time in intolerable conditions. Two questions arise when we speak about euthanasia: morally, what can we say about a person’ character who commits euthanasia, and legally, whether such actions should be forbidden by the law? Some people assert that though euthanasia is immoral, it is not necessary to forbid it in the legislative order. Three reasons which usually result as arguments against application of criminal sanctions are: first is realizing individual autonomy, second is reducing needless pain and suffering, and third would be providing psychological reassurance to dying patients (Emanuel 637). Others assert that though euthanasia is not wrong in all cases, it should not be allowed by the law. One variant of this argument asserts that euthanasia is morally allowable only in rare cases, but even there it is necessary to forbid it as its practice is easy to abuse, that legalization of euthanasia will bring more harm, than goods. Another variant says, that legalization puts patients in inconvenient positions of choice: whether to continue to live in suffering, or to cut one’s life short. This is a position in which nobody can be put. The value of a human life induces struggle, even to the point of becoming contrary to objective edical laws and in the most hopeless situations as the medical science and practice are rich with cases of healing of the most hopeless patients. Strong pains also are usually the reason of the request of the patient to speed up the approach of death, that is why she/he is compelled and insincere. Here, the doctor should resist them, and suggest the use of anesthetizing means, which the medicine today has available instead of following patient wishes. It is necessary to state firmly once more that nothing and no one can in any way permit the killing of an innocent human being, whether a fetus or an embryo, an infant or an adult, an old person or one suffering from an incurable disease, or a person who is dying. Furthermore, no one is permitted to ask for this act of killing, either for himself or herself or for another person entrusted to his or her care, nor can he or she consent to it, either explicitly or implicitly, nor can any authority legitimately recommend or permit such an action. For it is a question of the violation of the divine law, an offense against the dignity of the human person, a crime against life, and an attack on humanity (Robert, Gorman 158). Other cases when, for example, the person is in a long time coma and his/her consciousness is already lost irrevocably, and progressive medical technologies allow carrying out life-support treatment indefinitely. There is a question: whether or not this is necessary? Unfortunately, there are not unequivocal answers. Many scientists are afraid, that the formal sanction euthanasia can become the certain mental brake for search of new more effective means of diagnostics and treatment of seriously ill patients, and also to promote unconscientiousness in rendering medical aid to such a patient. Resuscitator’s help for his/her demands not only big material input, but also a huge pressure of physical and sincere forces of serving medical staff. Absence of appropriate treatment and care can stimulate requirements of the patient to speed up a fatal outcome that will allow the doctor to completely stop any treatment and care of the terminal patient. And in it one more of the reasons of necessity of legal regulation of the given question. (Keown 37-70) One strong argument against euthanasia is that killing of innocents is always morally evil. Therefore, euthanasia is morally evil. There is no way of disproving the principle: ‘It would always be wrong to kill an innocent human, whatever the consequences of not doing so’† (Steinbock 168). Supporters of euthanasia can appeal to the fact that the above-stated conclusion means distinction between justified and unjustified killings. On what basis is this distinction is made? If some kinds of killings are justified, why it is impossible to justify even in some circumstances voluntary euthanasia? Two kinds of murder are accepted even by many of the most zealous opponents to euthanasia -self-defense and punishment. Either of these is not unfair; as a matter of fact, they are not evil. It is possible to consider voluntary euthanasia as the third kind of justified killing? Lets try to resolve the argument of euthanasia as being beyond unfair murder on the basis of two key statements. First of all, the terminal condition of some people is such than it is better to let them die than to continue to live. A good example of such situations are those patients who suffer from strong pains or are doomed for a life in humiliating dependence on others even in satisfaction of the most elementary needs. Here, as benefiting euthanasia, frequently include the fatally sick and those who are in a constant vegetative condition. Second, helping someone in order to improve his/her health or moral condition is always morally allowable. If killing will improve someones condition, and the person himself/herself wants to die, then how such killing can be considered harmful to this person? How is it possible to consider this act unfair? How can it be wrong? And what then is voluntary euthanasia, if not that? This argument has serious flows, especially when it is used in the justification of the standard sanction. It is necessary to ask, whether or not it is the best way for all those patients, and even if it is so, whether or not their killing is a better alternative to inactivity? First of all it is not clear if fatally sick patients and those in vegetative conditions, benefit from early death. Second, there is a question that can be raised; is really the disgust from dependence on others for the last years of their life based on consciousness of their own advantage instead of on false arrogance? Finally, there are always other ways to dispose of pain. Speaking about euthanasia, it is necessary to face the concept of incurability. When is it possible to say with confidence that the patient is incurable? It is widely known, thatmistakes happen when doctors examine sick persons. Actually, the majorities of doctors remain true to their Hippocratic Oath and prefer to operate as professionals, instead of sympathizing. Suffering causes people to feel sympathy: kill a dog, that is suffering from a pain and doomed to death. Is it possible to give up such an act of mercy? But this pity already itself is ambiguous. Of course, frequently, the pain is intolerable, but quite often it becomes even more intolerable for those near to the patient. Relieving the patient from a pain, we frequently relieve our own suffering. It freedom of a choice of the patient really observed in that case? A call for help is answered by a mortal blow. To cause death first of all means to relieve those close to the patient from the necessity to hear this call: kill me, share my pain and help me! It is more difficult and more humane to accompany the patient in his/her suffering, than to destroy him/her. In conclusion, I would like to say, first, euthanasia (the example of killing innocent) is a moral evil and it should not be allowable by law, even in the cases specified in the standard sanction. Second, the standard sanction on euthanasia is threateningly unstable. One argument for its advantage supposes killing not only on the basis of standard medical reasons, but also in case of depression, shame and self-sacrifice. Another argument supposes euthanasia not only for those who want to die, but also for those who are not competent physically and/or emotionally to make that decision.