Assisted Suicide

But while some may say that physician assisted suicide is immoral and impractical because it deserts the hope for further healing, patients who are at death’s door should have the right to die with dignity with the aid of a practicing physician as an alternative to continually living with the burden of a terminal illness. Allowing physician assisted suicide to be an option for terminally ill patients alleviates the suffering that they may have to endure. How can the government make a decision to keep aching patients from alleviating their pain? The incident of Matthew Donnelly illustrates the perfect case of a patient whose suffering had gone on too long: Matthew’s job of working with x-ray research had left him with skin cancer that slowly deteriorated his entire body. With an estimate of only a year left to live, Matthew Donnelly laid in bed in excruciating pain for days.

It would be selfish to hold onto the relative only because the family does not want them to pass away, especially when the patient wanted to. It is the doctor’s and medical staff’s responsibility to meet the need of each patient’s need and do what they think is best for the patient (“Euthanasia, Assisted Suicide”). The doctor is not giving his best incentive care of the patient if he or she is suffering and have no will to live. The doctor, therefore, is not meeting his patient’s needs. If he or she chooses to be euthanized after suffering from a terminal illness, then it is the medical staff’s responsibility to meet the patient’s request.

The Broadreach Centre. N.p., n.d. Web.html (3 pp.) 21 Apr.2014. State-by-State Guide to Physician-Assisted Suicide - Euthanasia - ProCon.org." ProConorg Headlines.

28 Sept. 2011. Sullivan, Stephen. "The right to die: a discussion of 'rational suicide'." Mental Health Practice 14.6 (2011): 32-34. Academic Search Premier.

Euthanasia is legal in Washington only (Clarence H. Braddock, 2009). The thought of helping a patient who is suffering and they want to kill him or she is a very controversial topic as whether or not it is ethical for a doctor to end a person’s life. People who are against physician-assisted suicide feel that it is insulting God as well as murder. Others feel that it is a matter of choice. I feel very strongly that it is a matter of choice.

N.p., 4 Aug. 2010. Web. 23 Nov. 2013. • Terry, Peter. "Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide: Ethics and Politics."

Works Cited Hawkins, Gail N., ed. Physician- Assisted Suicide. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2002. 11-35. Kim, Clara S. Pros and Cons: Social Policy Debates of Our Time.

Euthanasia should only be used when it benefits the one who dies. It is a widely held belief that an act of euthanasia aims at benefiting the one who dies. It is morally wrong to engage in voluntary acts of euthanasia; it is morally wrong to engage in acts of non-voluntary euthanasia, and; it is never morally right to engage in acts of involuntary euthanasia. In situations where the patient is suffering when do you put the morally wrongs aside and help or get help in freeing yourself or a loved one from pain? Euthanasia is legal in other countries because it is considered assisted suicide, but is considered illegal in the United States for the same reason when it could actually be a tool used regularly by doctors in most hospitals and hospice settings to end life in a way that is deemed painless and dignified.

Therefore, we must reconsider the current and established policies regarding physician-assisted suicide to determine the policies’ viability. In analyzing various proposals for and against physician-assisted suicide and previous court cases, it is found that individual autonomy and individual liberties in taking one’s own life do not provide justification for a physician to assist in inducing a patient’s suicide (Varelius 236). Furthermore, it is the physician’s duty to assure the best quality of life for a patient, and it is not their duty to help a patient in judging that quality of life. Given this, a physician would be breaching his or her duty of care in assisting a patient’s suicide and may not be able to consider various other elements that would cause a patient to desire death; such as, mental distress, thinking that they may be a burden to others, and so forth. Alternatively, one will find self-determination a precedent in U.S. healthcare policy, and one must question why such self-determination would end at ph... ... middle of paper ... ...nna M., and Michael J. Newman.

For now the law says that a physician cannot assist suicide; this law affects those who are already dying from incurable diseases. This law is causing suffering amongst those citizens with intolerable diseases, depriving the people of a human right, and causing debt that could be fixed. Euthanasia is the painless killing of a patient, and I believe that it should be legal in every way possible. Many argue against the pro stance of euthanasia due to moral views, but they are limiting their mindset to not think of the people who are in pain every single day. James Rachels, a professor of moral philosophy writes in Bioethics “the distinction between active and passive euthanasia is thought to be crucial for medical ethics” (77).