If your girlfriend is from a well-to-do family, you could be looking at a fair lump. However, in this situation, the money will most likely be for show and returned to you after the wedding. This is a low-moderate amount by modern-day Thai standards.
A inequality in palliative care in places around the world is not enough to justify its circumvention.
If anything, the option of PAS not only decreases the growth of the success some palliative care has been able to prevent, but it will prevent it's growth in the future as well. Legalizing physician-assisted suicide is merely a part of the debate about improving end-of-life care.
It cannot be viewed as a quick and easy fix, or a way to protect patients from inadequate care arrangements. Too many people still suffer needlessly, often because doctors and families just do not know how to serve people who are dying.
The main problem lies with a lack of knowledge. Many suffer because doctors fail to provide adequate medication for pain. To legalize physician-assisted suicide would make real reform, such as better pain control, less likely.
And ultimately hurts the growth of the medical industry.
Without the reform of pain medication, patients end up with no prospects to live well while dying. In this scenario, making suicide an option is not offering a genuine choice but instead forcing a decision on the patient who again loses rights under this plan the affirmative have presented.
How to Save a Life In addition, if there are those whose death is inevitable who would like to be put out of their suffering early, it means that doctors will have a chance to examine their vital organs to see if they can be donated.
At later stages of many terminal illnesses, organs are severely weakened and, in some cases, failing - it may not be possible to use them at that point. This will help alleviate the long waiting list there is for organ donations. More thanmen women and children are waiting for organ transplants in the US alone with only 14, eligible donors.
PAS is an effective and ethical avenue to decrease this vast and fatal gap. Regardless of whether or not a patient decides to under PAS, they have already made the decision to be an organ donor, or not, well before the procedure.
There has not been a correlation shown between the number of people willing to be an organ donor if they underwent PAS From the Oregon studies.
We would also say that a push for organs would decrease the amount of care given even with a PAS. Because now the focus is not on the patient but on their organs. In the status quo, people who are registered donors are at times kept on life support against against their will, something we though, the proposition did not like to determine the organs sustainability for transplant.
Finally, if patients who have been cleared for PAS under the guidelines set out by the proposition, then they are already terminally ill, and thus, have failing organs already, not in good enough condition for transplant.
Since we on the proposition are on a similar pursuit as Michelangelo in creating a masterpiece, lets first look at what supporting physician-assisted suicide is not: The opposition has stated time and time again how palliative care can be a good thing but just needs reform. This offers no direct clash with our plan and our line of argumentation throughout the entire debate.
We recognize that palliative care as a viable option for patients, but we also have pointed out some of the pitfalls of palliative care and how PAS can be a benefit to those who have to suffer in these pits in some countries currently. Reform can be achieved in both PAS and palliative care under our plan.
Fundamentally, we respect the preference of the patient to choose whichever option.Latest breaking news, including politics, crime and celebrity. Find stories, updates and expert opinion. Following points can be taken into consideration while framing your debate: In favour of the motion: They are considered to be temporary property as they have to move to their husbands home after marriage, so it is not thought to be economically viable to spend on their education/5(29).
Who Says Education of a Girl Child is a Burden, Women carry an Average of 53% of total burden of Work in Developing countries. Among the Billion people living in poverty, Women consist of 70%. Educating them would not only solve the Gender Based Problems but would Also Give Women an Equal chance to represent them.
"Debate Points In Favour Of Topic Girls Education A Burden" Essays and Research Papers Debate Points In Favour Of Topic Girls Education A Burden Girl Child Education (GCE): A statement of FACTS By Dr Osita Excellence O. Oleribe. If anything it is the males that are a burden.
Access to education should be based on who is the best. At the moment I'm studying medicine and 70% of our group is female. A new topic is chosen every two months (the topics are chosen by some public school debate organization). The public/private school topic for November and December of was: Resolved, when in conflict, a business' responsibility to itself ought to be valued above its responsibility to society.