In some States of this union, euthanasia is legal and is administered to patients, in order, to kill them. Though, euthanasia proponents prefer to spin their viewpoint in a manner in which the deliberate and premeditated killing of specific and targeted patients is done only upon the behest of the patient and to relieve that patient of their pain and suffering, so that they will be able to die therefore on their own terms and with dignity, the bottom line is that euthanasia is the State-sanctioned administration of death.
The very first thing to really recognize about governmental euthanasia is that euthanasia is at best, a State-actuated assisted suicide. Further to the point, suicide in itself is most appropriately defined as self-murder. This thus signifies that any individual that kills their own self, without the aid of anybody else, has succeeded in murdering their own self, and hence the perpetrator and the victim are one and the same. On the other hand, euthanasia involves often not just one party, but usually several parties that assist in the killing of the patient when so done under medical supervision, typically aided by the administration of drugs that will induce death, so that in the scheme of things, those involved in such, are a material part of the killing of that person, and without State laws authorizing euthanasia, would be clearly susceptible to being charged with some degree of murder, or accessory to murder, depending upon the actions taken by those individuals, involved.
So too, it must be noted, that those that are the most vulnerable are the very ill, and especially the terminally ill, who may legitimately feel that their lives and their living are a burden to other people, as well as to their loved ones, and even to society itself, therefore making them much more susceptible to being persuaded or even encouraged to look upon their life as it currently is, as a burden, and that therefore since their utility to society is perceived as being minimal or non-existent, can be induced to believing that their life is no longer worth living.
All of the above, would signify, that the euthanasia of any patient, at any time, necessitates the taking of the time to fully evaluate the situation in a manner in which a conscientious decision as well as a consensus of such can be reasonably reached. This would indicate that though a patient may be entitled to request euthanasia, in those States permitting such, that the agreement to do so, should be something that reflects and only reflects a unanimous consensus of not only a medical physician, but also a psychiatric doctor, as well as a doctor of theology, in addition to the agreement to such by the closest next of kin, in which the patient has clearly, unequivocally, and voluntarily requested, euthanasia. Even then, there should be a "cooling off" period so that all parties can properly reflect upon such action, because the enactment of euthanasia once commenced is terminal.
Societies and communities may be judged on many levels, of which, one of the most pertinent, is how that society deals with those that are its most vulnerable, and are thereby least able to defend themselves; upon this, civilizations are rightly judged.