The arguments surrounding euthanasia are varied and far too extensive to fully explore in the scope of this essay, and as such are only briefly touched upon. However, while a great many published articles tend to "sit on the fence" regarding the issue of euthanasia, there is a great deal of public, and professional support for laws governing voluntary euthanasia to become more liberal in the U.K., as it is in the Netherlands.
If such a move was made, stringent guidelines would need to be in place as in the Netherlands, and requests for euthanasia should only be considered by the most severe terminal patients whose pain can not be palliated and they are in a state of torment and suffering, with guarantees that patients are not being coerced by family anxious to receive an inheritance, or by medic's who would like to free a bed. Ellis (1991) argues that this is morally and ethically acceptable and states that "Surely we need strictly policed legislation in favour of voluntary euthanasia, so that we, as nurses, can deliver in death in the dignified care we strive hard to deliver to our patients in life." Ellis (1991) p.160
While it would seem that at present euthanasia is legally unacceptable, the ethical and moral defences opposing euthanasia are subjective, and its acceptance or rejection on these grounds alone is left purely to individuals beliefs and experiences. However some people are willing to speak out against rigid legal positions, an example of whom is Tattam (1996) who argues that "The law is a blunt instrument. …
