My request is for the right to die. If someone suffers from a terminal illness that: 1) causes them great pain - the pain they are suffering exceeds their will to live (clarification below) 2) wants to commit suicide and is of sound mind such that their wish is reasonable. In this context, “healthy mind” means the ability to reason logically and not act on impulses or emotions. 3) the pain cannot be reduced to the level where they no longer want to commit suicide, then they should have the right to commit suicide. It should not be considered wrong for someone to give that person the tools necessary to commit suicide. The purpose of all three needs The first need – which causes great pain – is based on The word “euthanasia” comes from the ancient Greek “eu” - good and “thanatos” - death. Plato argued that suicide was against the will of the gods and was therefore wrong. He says patients who are unable to live normally should be denied treatment. Aristotle believed that suicide was wrong because the law forbids it. Hippocrates, the father of medicine, was against active euthanasia. In his famous “Hippocratic Oath”, a sentence prohibits the administration of a “deadly drug” [9] [11]. During the Middle Ages, assisted suicide was illegal. Thomas Aquinas argued that suicide goes against self-love and the desire to continue existing. He also viewed suicide as a violation of God's right to decide how long to live. This is weak when you consider the reasons why murder is wrong. Murder is wrong for various reasons: denying someone the right to life, causing fear in people that they might be killed, the pain that loved ones will suffer, etc. All these are not applicable to assisted suicide. The person has given up their right to life by consenting to suicide, there is no fear that this would be caused if only those who are terminally ill and consenting were killed, and the pain is inevitable anyway as death is imminent. an analogy with starving children [1]. This analogy does not hold up, since the reason assisted suicide is pursued is to alleviate suffering, and has no relation to the “value” of human life. Finally, they argue that allowing assisted suicide will push people to commit suicide [1]. This is an extremely weak argument. According to this logic, many things should be banned: for example, alcohol will be prohibited because allowing it would mean forcing people to drink. Furthermore, it asks the question: it takes the conclusion as the premise. The premise is that allowing assisted suicide causes pressure to commit suicide, and there is an implicit premise that committing suicide is wrong, but that is exactly the conclusion they are trying to draw.