Peer Response 3
· response should be a minimum of 75 words.

· In your replies to others, offer helpful feedback on their arguments. In particular, comment on the following:

· Validity: Is there any way that their premises could all be true and their conclusion false? If so, explain how. Can you suggest why a new premise might need to be added in order to make it valid?

· Truth of the premises: Are all of their premises actually true (especially the new ones added to make it valid)? If not, provide a counter-example, or explain why somebody with the opposing point of view might object to the premise. Keep in mind that objecting in this way to an argument is not impolite; you are just helping them to improve their reasoning.

PEERS RESPONSE:

Should people with an incurable disease be euthanized if it is their wish?

It is our right as people to decide to die with dignity.

My disease is incurable, and my quality of life will be affected.

Therefore, it should be my right to make an informed decision about when my life is to end.

I am in favor of this argument. When someone is diagnosed with a debilitating disease that is not able to be cured, I believe they should be allowed to make the choice. There has to be so many stipulations in place, because not everyone can decide when to die. I do believe though if you are of sound mind and able to make that decision for yourself it should be your right. Some diseases that are in incurable, wreak havoc on your body. It can be debilitating for your body and mind. In the end the patient may not be able to communicate, feed themselves, go to the bathroom, and may have lost the ability to recognize family and loved ones. There is pain involved daily as their body deteriorates and there is nothing to stop the process. If you don’t want to live like this until you die, because you have already been given the news that this disease will take your life, I believe you should be able to make the choice.

-Mia