Many people might say there is a fine line between right and wrong, but when it comes to the choice to end someone's life to end their suffering, who's to say where that line lies? When it comes to assisted suicide, for me that line is drawn on the side where assisted suicide is okay, but only under certain circumstances. “No one wants to die. Even people who want to go to heaven don't want to die to get there. Yet death is the destination we all share.” There are different types of euthanasia. The first is called "voluntary euthanasia" and is one in which the patient is willing and wants to die. The second is called "involuntary euthanasia", that is, one in which the victim does not want and does not want to die. The third type of euthanasia is called "active euthanasia", which is where the victim or doctor uses drugs to end the victim's life. The fourth type of euthanasia is called "passive euthanasia" or that in which the victim is killed by depriving him of the goods necessary to stay alive, such as water, food, drugs or medical-surgical interventions. The fifth type of euthanasia is called “doctor-assisted suicide,” in which the doctor kills the patients. The last type of euthanasia is called "assisted suicide", which is suicide aided by another person. (http://www.terrisfight.org/facts-about-euthanasia/) In my opinion, I think any type of suicide is wrong. In certain circumstances it is understandable, although still wrong. Studies show that the top five reasons given by patients who chose physician-assisted suicide in 2005 were: fear of decreasing ability to perform enjoyable activities, fear of losing dignity, fear of losing autonomy, fear of losing control of bodily functions and fear of being a burd...... middle of paper ......ason is one that I'm not sure I like very much, because dogs and humans are two totally different things, although both are living, I believe that dogs share a universal soul while humans are each individual. One last argument is: “Keeping people alive costs a lot of money, which could be used to save other people's lives” This argument also bothers me a bit. It's true that keeping people alive costs money, but that money goes to keeping people alive. While people kept alive are not willing to live, that alone counters my argument. (http://www.rsrevision.com/GCSE/christian_perspectives/life/eutanasia/for.htm)When it comes to a family member or loved one, how would you feel about being put in the position of where you have to choose life or death for that person? What would you choose? Even if that person wanted to die, where do you draw the line??