Legalization of Euthanasia

=Rebuttal="I see no reason why government run euthanasia centers would have to take this oath." - Euthanasia is also known as "Physician-assisted suicide" because doctors are the ones doing the killing. Since doctors are the ones performing Euthanasia, a violation of the Hippocratic Oath is very important. Unless my Opponent is advocating someone other than doctors doing the killing, which carries extreme implications."In a way euthanasia is in fact helping the terminally ill. Instead of refusing them their wish to die we are allowing them to choose for themselves. Instead of saying no we are giving a choice."- using that logic we would also be helping depressed people by killing them. Furthermore, Euthanasia gets abused, as the doctor Herbert Hend tells us (speaking of Euthanasia in the Netherlands): "Concern over charges of abuse led the Dutch government to undertake studies of the practice in 1990 and 1995. Many violations of the guidelines were evident from these two studies. For example, 60% of Dutch cases of assisted suicide and euthanasia are not reported, which by itself makes regulation impossible. The most alarming concern to arise from the Dutch studies has been the documentation of several thousand cases a year in which patients who have not given their consent have their lives ended by physicians. About a quarter of physicians stated that they had "terminated the lives of patients without an explicit request" from the patient to do so, and a third more of the physicians could conceive of doing so."[1]Euthanasia empowers doctors, not patients."Than make the process a multiple appointment process. There is probably a reason those who didn't get an intervention went through with it more. Perhaps they don't have anyone to hold an intervention for them." - Guidelines such as these could not be enforced, again take the Netherlands as an example according to BBC: "The reality is that a clear majority of cases of euthanasia, both with and without request, go unreported and unchecked."[2]Since Holland is the only country to legalize Euthanasia, this sets a historical precednt of abuse. My Opponent must show how this will not happen in the United States.=His answers to Cross Examination=1. However unless everyone was subjected to intense physcological analysis (not likely, especially considering how my Opponent spoke of saving money as part of his case) you can never truly know if they're insane. Example, the case that legalized Euthanasia in the Netherlands was a woman who wanted death because her family had died. If such a traumatic experience like that does NOT cause insanity I don't know what is. A want of death is a sign of insanity, an acceptance of death is a sign of wisdom. Let's not confuse this.2. Now we have someone else deciding on a persons right to life. Even close family members should not have the right to terminate someones existence.3. Ok, I thought that's how it would work, just clarifying.4. Yes, but how are these deductions made? Who makes them and what qualifications do they need?5. What do you mean no? The sanctity of life is a fundamental value in our society, indeed it is our most sacred value, how can this be outweighed by your impacts?6. So just people hired by the government to perform these Euthanasias?7. So basically it's also justified to kill a suicidal person evenb if they're perfectly healthy?8. So we are trusting the government to decide who is or isn't fit for life? Look what happened last time a government ran Euthanasia, in Nazi Germany: "The so-called "Euthanasia" program was National Socialist Germany's first program of mass murder, predating the genocide of European Jewry by approximately two years. The effort represented one of many radical eugenic measures which aimed to restore the racial "integrity" of the German nation. It endeavored to eliminate what eugenicists and their supporters considered "life unworthy of life"' [3]Governments, all governments, cannot be trusted with this power.9. The Hippocratic Oath which outlines what doctors are supposed to do is against Euthanasia, so are doctors supposed to disobey their code of ethics whenever it suits them?=His case=C1."People who live in great pain and suffering would have a way to get out of their pain and misery and die with dignity" -you speak of dignity quite alot, so I really must ask, how exactly is Euthanasia "dignified"? To me it seems like the easy way out, not dignified at all."Patients literally scream down the halls their desire for death."-same with mental hospitals, should we kill them too?C2.1. No solvency, money would still be spent on Euthanasia in the "government run centers".2. Valuing money over the sanctity of life, clear miscalculation in my opinion.3. His plan is likely to be more expensive with his "multiple appointments" requiring Physciartrists, Doctors, ect.Souces1. Hendin, Herbert. "Legalizing Euthanasia Eliminates Patient Autonomy and Reduces Quality of Care." Rest in comments.