Of Mice and Men Persuasive Essay

For this assignment, we had to write a persuasive essay on either the death penalty or mercy killing. Which ever one we chose, we had to pick to write about whether it is a positive or negative thing. I chose mercy killing and decided to write about how it is a positive.

What if a friend just lays in bed everyday, aching with pain and one watches his condition worsen every day? To what extent would it take someone to realize that they suffer greatly from that pain and that they don’t want to live through it? Mercy killing should be used more often these days. The negative effects of an illness or from dying people should make a number of people accept mercy killing. In the novel, Of Mice and Men, killing another is shown as a compassionate way to relieve them of their miseries. The two main characters, Lennie and George, are migrant workers who have recently been given jobs on a ranch in southern California. When they arrive at the ranch and meet the other men, they realize that living there won’t be easy for them. They find some of them men are hard to get along with, and some of them just don’t like Lennie and George at first sight. The positive aspects of mercy killing and how it can help a friendship in need are seen in both John Steinbeck’s novel Of Mice and Men and in modern society.

Killing someone with compassion is shown throughout this novel. George is a small, clever man who is the leader of the duo. Lennie is big and a little mentally compromised who doesn’t realize his own strength. Lennie always gets into trouble and often depends on George to save him. When George isn’t there to help him, things can go terribly wrong. One night when all of the men went out, Lennie was left at the ranch. When the boss’s daughter-in-law came to visit Lennie, he got himself into trouble. He accidentally killed the woman. After he realizes she is dead, he instantly knows he did something wrong and that George will be angry with him. Lennie becomes confused and doesn’t know where to go or what to do. When the men comes back to find Curley’s dead wife in the barn, the men immediately get angry and wants to find Lennie and kill him right on the spot. When George finds Lennie, he tries to make him feel happy and relaxed. George ends up making a hard decision that reflects his love for his friend. To prevent the other men from shooting Lennie, George wants to do it himself. “‘I thought you was mad at me, George.’ ‘No,’ said George. ‘No, Lennie. I ain’t mad. I never been mad, an’ I ain’t now. That’s the thing I want ya to know.’ The voices came close now. George raised the gun and listened to the voices…And George raised the gun and steadied it, and he brought the muzzle of it close to the back of Lennie’s head. The hand shook violently, but his face set and his hand steadied. He pulled the trigger…” (Steinbeck, 106) George has no reasonable choice, but to kill Lennie himself. George knows nothing beneficial will happen to Lennie. He would most likely have to die a painful death from the angry group of men shooting him. If Lennie ended up not being killed, he would have to go to jail for committing a crime. George doesn’t want Lennie to go to jail because he knows Lennie would be confused for the rest of his life, wondering why he deserved to be locked up. George abolishes the hardships Lennie would go through whether it was dying a painful, confusing death caused by strange men, or spending the rest of his life bewildered in jail. Since Lennie is George’s loving companion, he wants what’s best for Lennie; to leave behind the troubles the future will cause Lennie. Not only is mercy killing used for Lennie, but Candy, who is the ‘swamper’ of the ranch, has a dog that is suffering also and is in need of help. When the men were gathered in Candy’s room, Carlson comments on the negatives of Candy’s dog. He describes the dog as ‘ancient’ and complains about how much he smells. He also mentions to Candy that the dog is old and has a lot of trouble getting through each day. Since the dog is deteriorating, Carlson tries to persuade Candy to kill the dog. “‘God awmighty, that dog stinks. Get him outa here, Candy!’…‘Got no teeth,’ he said. “He’s all stiff with rheumatism. He ain’t no good to you, Candy. An’ he ain’t no good to himself. Why’n’t you shoot him, Candy?’” Another man, Slim, also agrees with Carlson’s beliefs. “‘Carl’s right, Candy. That dog ain’t no good to himself. I wisht somebody’d shoot me if I got old an’ a cripple.’” (Steinbeck, 44-45) The men all agree that the dog is old and has suffered enough, living through the last days of his life. They all want to end the dog’s misery by killing him. When the dog is gone, the men don’t have to deal with the burdens he gives them, as well as his horrifying smell. Above all, they will take the dog out of his pain. Mercy killing helps anyone, whether it’s a human or an animal, as George and Lennie and Candy’s dog shows.

Mercy killing is a favor to many people in misery, but not everyone knows that. Many people in today’s society agree that a patient should have the right to choose their own death. Illnesses and other life threatening situations are very personal, so it should be the person’s decision of what they want to do with their life. If someone has a long lasting illness, such as ALS, they have to spend the rest of their life through the negative effects of that disease. It should be the person’s decision whether or not they want to live through the disease until they die naturally, or if they want to try to die sooner. This is the most reasonable solution since the person actually going through the illness knows how much pain they’re in and whether or not they can deal with it for the rest of their life. People should have the right to make personal decisions for themselves; not having a stranger choose for them whether they should live or die. No one should speak for someone else, saying if the patient can die or not because that person isn’t living through what the patient has to. The idea of mercy killing applies to many real life situations between the actual burden to the person and the decisions that goes along with it. When my grandfather aged and was put in a convalescent home, it was obvious that he wasn’t happy there. He couldn’t walk, barely ate, and needed assistance to do many tasks that healthy people have no problem doing. For him, and for many people who go though the same thing as my grandfather did, not being able to do anything for themselves is unbearable. Since he didn’t eat, weakness took over him and he couldn’t do much, but just sit there. My family wanted him to die to get him out of his misery; not through hatred. When one is at the point of their life when they are about to die from old age, it is quite common many people suffer from bodily deterioration. When their body fails, life becomes quite difficult, and dying is the only option to escape from the pain and misery. Mercy killing is a favor to many people who suffer because it can bring them into peace.

The positive aspects of mercy killing are seen in both John Steinbeck’s novel Of Mice and Men and should be seen more in modern society. In the novel, mercy killing is used as something that helps one to prevent a bad future for them. When misery or a painful death is near in the future, the only way to stop that from happening is to be dead beforehand. Dying a happy, peaceful death is much better than to live life in depression. People all over the world should be able to make the choice of whether they want to live through a burden the rest of their life for themselves. No one actually knows what pain that person is going through, except for the person themself. Mercy killing is a favor to many people. It is only a way to help a person get through their sufferings and it should not be illegal. Life should be lived happily, not through suffering.

Sources:
Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck, published 1937, New York, New York, U.S.A.

Richman, Sheldon (2004, June 23). Commentaries. Retrieved December 15, 2006, from The Fraud of Physician Suicide Web site: http://www.fff.org/comment/com0406i.asp

Braddock III, Clarence H. "Ethics in Medicine." Physician-Assisted Suicide: Ethical Topic in Medicine. 2001, October. University of Washington School of Medicine. 15 Dec 2006. Web site: http://depts.washington.edu/bioethx/topics/pas.html

Panzer, Ron. "Questionable Death, Assisted Suicide, Mercy Killing (& Involuntary Euthanasia)." Assisted Suicide, Mercy Killing & Euthanasia. 2000, January. Hospice Patients Alliance. 15 Dec 2006. Web site: http://www.hospicepatients.org/questionable-death.html.