本文是一篇essay代寫范文，題目為Should animals be euthanized as humans?本文主要討論了動物是否應該像人類一樣被安樂死。安樂死在需要動物幫助他們完成一些實驗的人們中越來越普遍。確實，協助死亡絕不排除可能提供的最佳姑息治療，而是融合了同情照顧和對患者自主權的尊重，最終使有尊嚴的死亡成為現實。
Should animals be euthanized as humans?
It is not uncommon that euthanasia is increasingly popular for people who need animals to help them to complete some experiments. It seems to be true that assisting death in no way precludes giving the best palliative care possible but rather integrates compassionate care and respect for the patient's autonomy and ultimately makes death with dignity a real option.
Admittedly, this kind of death , to some extent, could reduce the pain of the animals if they are necessary in the animal experiments. However, why do not we think about the problem that why human are always killing animals and find a very appropriate cause for themselves to claim to the world that we are do something that is beneficial to the animals by killing themselves to do the animal experiments. People always say that we have tried our best to protect the animals and to make them comfortable when they have to be confronted with death because of human. So, why do not these people also try this way when they realized they are needed in some fields?
That is to say, opposing euthanasia to palliative care neither reflects the Dutch reality that palliative medicine is incorporated within end-of-life care nor the place of the option of assisted death at the request of a patient within the overall spectrum of end-of-life care even though people always find a variety of reasons to beautify this action.
Some people would like to say that people have the rights to die if they have no living wills. More interestingly, they would quote these words to prove they are right.” "The right of a competent, terminally ill person to avoid excruciating pain and embrace a timely and dignified death bears the sanction of history and is implicit in the concept of ordered liberty. The exercise of this right is as central to personal autonomy and bodily integrity as rights safeguarded by this Court's decisions relating to marriage, family relationships, procreation, contraception, child rearing and the refusal or termination of life-saving medical treatment”(Vacco,1996) .However, they might ignore a significant fact that it seems to be the right of people rather than animals. This is because it might be interesting that animal also would choose death when they are facing with the unfair treatment of their boss while working or with the discrimination resulting from the different status and salaries. Obviously, all these actions belongs to human rather than animals.
We wish to take a strong stand against the separation and opposition between euthanasia and assisted suicide, on the one hand, and palliative care, on the other that such critics have implied even though the evidence for the emotional impact of assisted dying on physicians shows that euthanasia and assisted suicide are a far cry from being 'easier options for the caregiver' than palliative care, as some critics of practice have suggested. There is no 'either-or' with respect to these options (Kimsma, 2004). Every appropriate palliative option available must be discussed with the patient and, if reasonable, tried before a request for assisted death can be accepted.
In addition, laws should be established to against euthanasia and assisted suicide are in place to prevent abuse and to protect people from unscrupulous doctors and others. They are not, and never have been, intended to make anyone suffer.
In conclusion, it is not fair for animals to die with euthanasia even though it seems that everything is appropriate for human. However, animals are not human and they should not be treated as human because of the different nature and qualities. Therefore, weather we should kill the animals with euthanasia should be thought over and over again.