Is the phrase right to die applicable as a right? Leon R. Kass believes that the claim of a right to die is insubstantial because of the precursors pertaining to the meaning of rights. Leon R. Kass believes that the right to die is an ineffectual statement and unprecedented, that it is portrayed as a civil duty to which all should be in unison because Euthanasia is after all Mercy Killing. Right!? This case delves into the moral domain, within which it derives its relevance to the subject of Bioethics, Euthanasia is a popular subject that health care professionals, lawyers and theologians have dealt with for a long time. While it is an extreme and exceptional case to support and argue in favor of, euthanasia among health care professionals and lay public, it becomes more and more common to see supporters of this act especially among health care professionals. Leon R. Kass is trying is trying to convince people that the issues of Euthanasia connected to the concept of rights are incomprehensible. Leon R. Kass states that taken literally, a right to die would denote merely a right to the inevitable; the certainty of death for all the lives is the touchstone of fated inevitability. The reason that these issues have come about is because of the growing technological advances in the medical field. People fear that their lives will end undignified elongation of life, years of reduced far below ordinary standards of civilized life and conduct, of incompetence, and dependence. The people who claim this right believe that a human has the right to live, and that same human should have the right to die under specified conditions of course. Leon R. Kass states that a right to die is increasingly asserted and gaining poplar strength. Americans now believe that if life is miserable one has the right to get out, actively and with help if necessary. It has been fashionable for some time now and in many aspects of American public life f...
