Points anti-euthanasia campaigners are saying to outlaw euthanasia

The Case for 'Pro-life'
The strongest anti-euthanasia arguments of areas are:-

A) Against medical ethics
Doctors take what is called the Hippocratic Oath at the commencement of their practice, in which we find written: 'I will give no deadly medicine to anyone if asked, nor suggest such council...' The doctors are breaking their oath when they administer lethal drugs to patients.

B) Euthanasia does not necessarily provide a painless and dignified death
The pro-life campaigners cite examples that to show the painless, easy and respectable death with the help of a death-pill or a gentle injection that the patients want may actually not be there. For starters, the methods of Euthanasia are not necessarily mild and painless. Contrary to the picture painted of the patient gently leaving his body surrounded by his close ones, injection of certain lethal chemicals can cause pain and visible bodily reactions that others may not be able to watch. 'Death with Dignity' is thrown out of the window when patients are killed with gasses like carbon monoxide or smothered to death with plastic bags.

C) The 'Slippery Slope' argument
The gist of this famous argument is that to legalize Euthanasia once, no matter how strong are the restrictions placed on it, means to open the floodgates to a change that will inevitably go out of control. The Nazi and Dutch Euthanasia practices are used as examples of this. As we have seen earlier, the original Nazi Euthanasia program later degenerated into state-sanctioned misuse eventually leading to the death of millions of innocent people. In the Netherlands also, anti-euthanasia activists see a similar shift in the public attitude towards Euthanasia. Although, it was earlier sanctioned to be used at the 'explicit request' of the patient and only in exceptional conditions, recent cases have appeared in which both Involuntary Euthanasia as well as Euthanasia under less extreme medical conditions have been carried. This is exactly the point the pro-life people are making. After Euthanasia is legalized, acceptance of it by the public will grow and its misuse will landslide.

D) Alternative treatments do exist
Medical practitioners and researchers argue the condition of intractable pain in which the patient asks for Euthanasia can be cured without his death. State-of-the-art technology in pain management and the growing hospice movement in the West mean that patients no longer need to choose death over life even during a terminal illness.

E) Doctors and medical personnel get too much power
Since doctors wield so much influence over patients' decision-making, a negligence or mistake on their part can lead to unnecessary voluntary deaths. Also, a patient's request won't necessarily be voluntary. In a society where Euthanasia is legal, more terminally ill and old people will feel the pressure to accept it to relieve the burden they place on their close ones and the government.

In many countries where the government pays for the medical care of the poor, medical personnel are increasingly under pressure to cut costs. And the people who are trying to cut down such government funding are also supporting Euthanasia. Legalization may lead to a situation where health care budget is reduced and poor needy patients subjected instead to 'death treatment'.

F) Many quarters are against it
Anti-euthanasia supporters dispute the claim that the only convictions for rejecting Euthanasia are religious in nature and have tried to show that very few in the opposition are actually motivated by religious reasons. For instance, when California tried to legalize it, many prominent medical associations and influential newspapers were against it.