Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Case of physician assisted suicide
Physician assisted suicide pro and cons in conclusion
Essays on physician assisted suicide
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Case of physician assisted suicide
Roux 1
Physician-assisted suicide (PAS) is when a physician facilitates a patient’s death by providing the necessary means and/or information to enable the patient to perform the life-ending act, such as providing a lethal dose of medication and the information about the lethal dose (Opinion 2.211...). PAS is a very emotional and controversial topic in today’s world, as suicide attempts of those with terminal illnesses are increasing. Many have expressed different opinions when it comes to terminally ill patients and the ethical concerns tied to PAS. Terminally ill patients exhibit normal character and are of sound mind when making such a life threatening decision (Weir, 1997). Many countries and states have not been able to reach a decision
…show more content…
Adkins was a member of the Hemlock Society -- an organization that advocates voluntary euthanasia for terminally ill patients -- before she became ill. After she was diagnosed with Alzheimer's, Adkins began searching for someone to end her life before the degenerative disease took full effect. She had heard through the media about Kevorkian's invention of a "suicide machine," and contacted Kevorkian about using the invention on her. Kevorkian agreed to assist her in a public park, inside his Volkswagen van. Kevorkian attached the IV, and Adkins administered her own painkiller and then the poison. Within five minutes, Adkins died of heart failure. When the news hit media outlets, Kevorkian became a national celebrity -- and criminal. The State of Michigan immediately charged Kevorkian with Adkins' murder. The case was later dismissed, however, due to Michigan's indecisive stance on assisted suicide.(Jack Kevorkian Biography)
The largest argument that proponents have for PAS is that every able individual has the right to decide on the manner in which they live, and therefore should control the timing and the manner of death they wish to face (Hawkins, 2002). Medical experts say that terminal illnesses can expose patients to long years of pain and suffering before they eventually die, which is not avertable, and that the sanctity
Diane: A Case of Physician Assisted Suicide. Diane was a patient of Dr. Timothy Quill, who was diagnosed with acute myelomonocytic leukemia. Diane overcame alcoholism and had vaginal cancer in her youth. She had been under his care for a period of 8 years, during which an intimate doctor-patient bond had been established.
There are many convincing and compelling arguments for and against Physician Assisted Suicide. There are numerous different aspects of this issue including religious, legal and ethical issues. However, for the purpose of this paper, I will examine the ethical concerns on both sides. There are strong pro and con arguments regarding this and I will make a case for both. It is definitely an issue that has been debated for years and will continue to be debated in years to come.
The ongoing controversy about Physician assisted suicides is an ongoing battle among physicians, patients and court systems. The question of whether or not individuals have the “right” to choose death over suffering in their final days or hours of life continues to be contested. On one side you have the physicians and the Hippocratic Oath they took to save lives; on the other you have the patients’ right to make life choices, even if that means to choose death to end suffering. The ultimate question “is it ethical for a physician to agree to assisted suicides and is it ethical for a patient to request assisted suicide?
gotten to the point where they feel as if there is no point in living.
In the medical field, there has always been the question raised, “What is ethical?” There is a growing conflict between two important principles: autonomy and death being considered a medical treatment. Physician assisted suicide is defined as help from a medical professional,
The issue of physician assisted suicide has been around for quite a while. There has been many court cases on it to make it legalized but all of it has been struck down by the Supreme Court. What seem to be a lost cause in the past is now becoming a real possibility as America moves further into the twenty-first century. As citizens increase their support for PAS, many states are beginning to draft bills to legalize this cause, with tough restriction and regulation of course. In 1997, Oregon became the first state to legalized physician assisted suicide for the terminally ill. Soon after, three other states (Washington, Vermont, and Montana) follow Oregon’s footstep while two other states are inching closer to making this procedure legal. Even so, there are still many people against PAS and are constantly fighting this from becoming legal. With the rise of popularity on this issue, the debate on whether one has the right to end their life, and the morality of this issue are reason why the UTA community should care about this topic and why it is worth exploring the three position concerning PAS. In this paper, I will discuss the three main position on this debate: that physician assisted suicide should be illegal, that physician assisted suicide should be limited to terminally ill patient, and that physician assisted suicide should be available for everyone.
Physician assisted suicide (PAS) is a very important issue. It is also important tounderstand the terms and distinction between the varying degrees to which a person can be involved in hastening the death of a terminally ill individual. Euthanasia, a word that is often associated with physician assisted suicide, means the act or practice of killing for reasons of mercy. Assisted suicide takes place when a dying person who wishes to precipitate death, requests help in carrying out the act. In euthanasia, the dying patients may or may not be aware of what is happening to them and may or may not have requested to die. In an assisted suicide, the terminally ill person wants to die and has specifically asked for help. Physician-assisted suicide occurs when the individual assisting in the suicide is a doctor rather than a friend or family member. Because doctors are the people most familiar with their patients’ medical condition and have knowledge of and access to the necessary means to cause certain death, terminally ill patients who have made
The approach of physician-assisted suicide respects an individual’s need for personal dignity. It does not force the terminally ill patient to linger hopelessly, and helplessly, often at great cost to their psyche. It drive’s people mad knowing they are going to die in a short period of time, suffering while they wait in a hospital bed.
In closing, despite all of the different opinions that people have on PAS, there are many good outcomes that come with the decision. Having the right to make a “choice” is what PAS comes down to. Many argue that it is inhumane, while many will argue that it is a choice. If choosing PAS as a last dying right, then one should respect that choice. It is a choice and only the patient should have the right to choose.
The right to assisted suicide is a significant topic that concerns people all over the United States. The debates go back and forth about whether a dying patient has the right to die with the assistance of a physician. Some are against it because of religious and moral reasons. Others are for it because of their compassion and respect for the dying. Physicians are also divided on the issue. They differ where they place the line that separates relief from dying--and killing. For many the main concern with assisted suicide lies with the competence of the terminally ill. Many terminally ill patients who are in the final stages of their lives have requested doctors to aid them in exercising active euthanasia. It is sad to realize that these people are in great agony and that to them the only hope of bringing that agony to a halt is through assisted suicide.When people see the word euthanasia, they see the meaning of the word in two different lights. Euthanasia for some carries a negative connotation; it is the same as murder. For others, however, euthanasia is the act of putting someone to death painlessly, or allowing a person suffering from an incurable and painful disease or condition to die by withholding extreme medical measures. But after studying both sides of the issue, a compassionate individual must conclude that competent terminal patients should be given the right to assisted suicide in order to end their suffering, reduce the damaging financial effects of hospital care on their families, and preserve the individual right of people to determine their own fate.
The concern that comes to mind, when considering ideas I’ve been exposed to in our ethics course, and that causes me some apprehension due its inevitable involvement it in my career as a physician is treating patients requesting euthanasia or physician assisted suicide/death (PAD). While this isn’t a performance-based concern per se nor do I anticipate its occurrence often, I am apprehensive because at the onset of writing this paper I didn’t have any reservations in advocating for or offering PAD as a means to end suffering.
Thesis Statement: Physician assisted suicide or euthanasia may offer an accelerated and pain relieved alternative to end someone’s suffering, therefore people should not be denied the right to die especially when faced with terminal illnesses.
Physician-assisted suicide refers to the physician acting indirectly in the death of the patient -- providing the means for death. The ethics of PAS is a continually debated topic. The range of arguments in support and opposition of PAS are vast. Justice, compassion, the moral irrelevance of the difference between killing and letting die, individual liberty are many arguments for PAS. The distinction between killing and letting die, sanctity of life, "do no harm" principle of medicine, and the potential for abuse are some of the arguments in favor of making PAS illegal. However, self-determination, and ultimately respect for autonomy are relied on heavily as principle arguments in the PAS issue.
According to Endoflife.edu, physician-assisted suicide (PAS) is when a physician gives a terminally ill patient materials and information needed to end their life peacefully (EndLink, n.d.). PAS ends patient suffering and promotes the dignity of dying patients. This act gives patients the power to control their lives, especially when their illness has controlled them. Granted, patients need to assess all avenues of pain relief, physiological treatment and life fulfillment before coming to the permanent solution of PAS. However, physician-assisted suicide is morally acceptable in certain circumstances when a consenting, terminally ill adult decides, after thorough deliberation, to end their suffering by ending their life. Although there are reasonable arguments against suicide such as motivation for medical advancement and the chance of the terminally ill getting better, they do not supersede an individual’s right to make decisions about their life and their death.
Throughout the course of history, death and suffering have been a prominent topic of discussion among people everywhere. Scientists are constantly looking for ways to alleviate and/or cure the pain that comes with the process of dying. Treatments typically focus on pain management and quality of life, and include medication and various types of therapy. When traditional treatments are not able to eliminate pain and suffering or the promise of healing, patients will often consider euthanasia or assisted suicide. Assisted suicide occurs when a person is terminally ill and believes that their life is not worth living anymore. As a result of these thoughts and feelings, a physician or other person is enlisted to “assist” the patient in committing suicide. Typically this is done by administering a lethal overdose of a narcotic, antidepressant or sedative, or by combining drugs to create an adverse reaction and hasten the death of the sick patient. Though many people believe that assisted suicide is a quick and honorable way to end the sufferings of a person with a severe illness, it is, in fact, morally wrong. Assisted suicide is unethical because it takes away the value of a human life, it is murder, and it opens the door for coercion of the elderly and terminally ill to seek an untimely and premature death. Despite the common people’s beliefs, assisted suicide is wrong and shouldn’t be legalized.