I am interested in the topic of euthanasia because it is relevant to my major and to my future career goal as a nurse practitioner. It is something that I feel passionate about and I have taken a strong stance against it. This question does affect my values. One way is because of my religious views as a Christian. This is one reason why I have chosen to take the stance against euthanasia. In the Bible, it specifically says "thou shalt not kill", and euthanizing someone, no matter the reason, is still a form of murder. As of right now, I do not have any personal first hand experiences regarding euthanasia, but I am very interested in it because it relates to my studies at the University of South Carolina as a nursing major. I have at this point thoroughly researched this topic and will continue to do so throughout this entire writing process. The sources that I have gathered all provide much credibility to the topic of euthanasia with qualified authors and online sources. 

The first source that I found is an informative article, titled "Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide", that explains to readers the different definitions of euthanasia, classifications of euthanasia, options for terminal patients, some history of the practice, and arguments for and against voluntary euthanasia. The article states that euthanasia, also known as assisted suicide, is the ending of a person's life to relieve their suffering. There are also two classifications of euthanasia: voluntary and involuntary. Voluntary euthanasia is done with consent, while involuntary euthanasia is done without consent of the patient. The article also references legislation that has passed regarding euthanasia, and arguments for and against it. The author of this article is Christian Nordqvist. He is the part owner of "Medical News Today", is the founder of Medilexicon International Limited and also has much knowledge on the topic of euthanasia. Since this article is informative, it presents the information with an unbiased viewpoint on euthanasia. 

The second source that I found is an argumentative article, titled "Arguments Against Euthanasia", that presents many interesting points against euthanasia. The author references assisted suicide practices in the Netherlands often, because it is legal there, and explains how it has been corrupted in the medical system with eye-opening statistics. The article also cautions that euthanasia could compromise doctors' medical integrity because of the Hippocratic Oath that prohibits doctors from killing/assisting a patient to kill themselves. This could lead to a very slippery slope of doctors hurting patients rather than helping them. The author of this source is Bill Pesh. Pesh is a family law attorney and has been practicing law for approximately 30 years. He has a law degree from the American University Washington College of Law in Washington D.C. Pesh has experience working with euthanasia cases which also adds to his credibility as an author. Since this article is arguing against euthanasia, it brings some bias into it. It does not touch much on the side for euthanasia, but it mainly speaks about why euthanasia should not be legalized. 

The third source that I found is also an argumentative article, titled "Always Care, Never Kill: How Physician-Assisted Suicide Endangers the Weak, Corrupts Medicine, Compromises the Family, and Violates Human Dignity and Equality". It provides the reader with four main points on why euthanasia should not become legalized. These points include the argument that euthanasia endangers feeble patients, taints the original intentions of how medicine should work, changes a family's commitments to a patient by making them feel like a burden, and infringes upon a patient's dignity. The article also includes specific peoples' personal experiences with euthanasia and the effects it brought on their families. It highlights some personal experiences where a patient chose not to be euthanized and ended up living a much longer and happier life than was estimated by physicians. The main claim of this article is that it is a physician's duty to always care, and never to kill. The author of this article is Ryan T. Anderson. He is a Princeton University graduate and also has his doctorate from the University of Notre Dame in political philosophy. He is the founder of the "Public Discourse" which is an online journal of Princeton. This source argues against euthanasia; therefore, it offers some bias since it is mainly one sided. 

My research question is arguable because there are many people are for euthanasia and many people against it. My sources agree that euthanasia compromises a doctor/physician's role in the work place. Both of the argumentative sources that I found agree that a physician's role is to help and treat patients, not assist them in their death. All three of the sources I found helped strengthen my opinion and stance against euthanasia. They provided me with evidence and facts about this practice that made my position and my argument stronger. I may revise my research question by further narrowing it to a more specific question.
