Everyone at some point in their life will have to deal with a tragic death. Either the death of a family member like a mother or father, or a best friend. It is easy say how you will feel once it happens, but what if you had to be the one to make the decision? Could you be the one held responsible to keep someone you love alive longer then they originally intended?. Many stories have turned into a media frenzy with the assisted suicide by Dr. Jack Kevorkian to help 54 yr. old Janet Adkins end her suffering from Alzheimer’s, to Terry Shiavo who suffered from extreme hypokalemia and her lifeless body was torn between her husband wanted to pull the plug to let her die a painless death to her family who wanted to keep her artificially kept alive. …show more content…
Kevorkian's assisted suicides. In 1989 Dr. Kevorkian had his first public assisted suicide. Janet Adkins of Michigan suffered from severe Alzheimer's disease. She no longer wanted to deal with the pain of having Alzheimer’s; so she gave Dr. Kevorkian the permission to put it in the simplest of terms, kill herself. Although many politicians agree that a person should have the right to end one's life, but they cringe to the fact of someone ending their own life. Kevorkian would be charged with second-degree murder, and sentenced to 10-25 years in prison for the death of Janet Adkins, but which would eventually be dropped due to the state of Michigan not having any laws on the books regarding assisted suicide. Over the course of his career, Dr. Kevorkian would assist terminally ill patients 130 times with his machine that built himself called “Thanatron” or simply the death machine. One of his last assists, would be of 52 yr. old Thomas Youk. Thomas Youk suffered from the terminal illness Lou Gehrig’s disease, for which he was in the final stages. In November of 1998, Dr. Kevorkian agreed to broadcast the suicide on the television show CBS News’ 60 minutes which publicly aired the voluntary euthanasia of Mr. Youk. On September 17th, 1998, Mr. Kevorkian would administer Mr. Youk a lethal injection. After Mr. Youk was pronounced dead, his family would later describe the injection as humane, not …show more content…
Mrs. Schiavo had a heart attack from suffering from hypokalemia from personal dieting. Because of her heart attack and laying faced down, without breathing, oxygen would be cut off from her brain causing her to fall into a persistent vegetative state (PVS) after her sudden cardiac arrest. The following June, her husband Michael Schiavo, was appointed as Terri’s legal guardian. Eight years later, he would file a petition to remove the feeding tube that was keeping his wife alive, which her parents obviously opposed. Her parents went with the more religious approach claiming that Terri was a devout Roman Catholic who would not have wished to go about violating the churches’ teachings on euthanasia. After years of back and forth between her husband, parents and the Florida legal system, Terri finally officially died on March 31st, 2005. Nearly 15 years of suffering due to her being forced to stay alive artificially. In a study done by the medical examiner, he stated that all the patients that die due to the feeding tube removal, as which in the Mrs. Schiavo case, die an unusual peaceful
In February of 1990 a woman named Terri Schiavo collapsed at home suffering cardiac arrest in her home in St. Petersburg, Florida. She was resuscitated but had severe brain damage because she had no oxygen going to her brain for several minutes. Terri was severely brain damaged and in a vegetative state but could still breathe and maintain a heart beat on her own. After two and a half months and no signs of improvement, impaired vision, and the inability to move her arms and legs she needed a feeding tube to sustain her life since she seemed to be in a persistent vegetative state. For 2 years doctors attempted speech and physical therapy with no success. In 1998 Schiavos husband claimed she would not want to live in that quality of life without a prospect of recovery so he tried several times over the course of many years to pull the feeding tube so she could pass. Bob and Mary Schindler challenged and fought for a
There are several important ethical issues related to euthanasia. One is allowing people who are terminally ill and suffering the right to choose death. Should these people continue to suffer even though they really are ba...
Imagine that you have been diagnosed with a terminal illness such as cancer and given six months to live. The remainder of your life will be spent in a hospital undergoing treatment and suffering from unbearable pain. Do you want to die or do you want to live the rest of your life in agony? The controversial issue of doctor assisted suicide is followed by a big question. Should states legalize doctor assisted suicide? Physician assisted suicide gives the right for physicians to administer to certain patients lethal doses of drugs with the intention of ending a patients life (Coburn 266). My research for this argument was based on Jack Kervorkian, better known as "doctor death." He has admitted helping more than 130 people end their lives (BBC News Online Network). Kevorkian is from Michigan and has stood trial a number of times for practicing physician assisted suicide. In his latest trial, April 13, 1999, he was charged with a second-degree murder conviction with a penalty of 10-25 years imprisonment with no possibility of bail (Hyde). Dr. Jack Kevorkian stated in the trial that it was his "duty as a doctor" to help patients end their suffering by taking their own lives (Lessenberry 16). In my argument I am going to discuss the issue of whether or not he should have been found guilty of murder. Assisting anyone in death is murder and the court was correct when they charged Kevorkian guilty of murder.
Terri Schiavo collapsed on February 25, 1990 in her Florida home from an “ice tea diet” which was related to her bulimia, which was the result of a potassium deficiency. After her heart stopped for five minutes, Terri ended up with brain damage. This brain damage was permanent and made Terri go into a vegetative state for the last fifteen years of her life. The doctors stated that there was no chance that she would return to normal someday. It wouldn’t be right to keep her on life support.
Imagine being diagnosed with a disease that is going to kill you, but then you learn that you cannot do anything to avoid the pain it will cause you. The palliative care you will receive will only be able to provide slight comfort. You look at the options and consult with your physician, and decide physician-assisted suicide, or PAS, is what you want. Within the last two decades, the argument regarding physician-assisted suicide has grown. While some believe that death should be "natural", physician-assisted suicide helps the terminally ill maintain their dignity while dying. Physician assisted suicide should be a viable option for those diagnosed with a terminal illness. It provides a permanent relief to the pain and suffering that is involved
In her paper entitled "Euthanasia," Phillipa Foot notes that euthanasia should be thought of as "inducing or otherwise opting for death for the sake of the one who is to die" (MI, 8). In Moral Matters, Jan Narveson argues, successfully I think, that given moral grounds for suicide, voluntary euthanasia is morally acceptable (at least, in principle). Daniel Callahan, on the other hand, in his "When Self-Determination Runs Amok," counters that the traditional pro-(active) euthanasia arguments concerning self-determination, the distinction between killing and allowing to die, and the skepticism about harmful consequences for society, are flawed. I do not think Callahan's reasoning establishes that euthanasia is indeed morally wrong and legally impossible, and I will attempt to show that.
Today's society is now introduced to one of the most controversial issues; assisted suicide. Just like in other controversial arguments, there are many people that feel that it is wrong for people to ask their healthcare provider to end one's life; while others feel that if the person is terminally ill and has given their will to die, that they can be assisted in suicide. Though both sides are reasonable many people believe that people should not take part in helping someone take their own life, assisted suicide should be legal because, it plays a factor of conquering one’s feelings, gives an option to those whom are terminally ill or in immense pain, and every human
According to West’s Encyclopedia of American Law, between 1990 and 1999, a well-known advocate for physician assisted suicide, Jack Kevorkian helped 130 patients end their lives. He began the debate on assisted suicide by assisting a man with committing suicide on national television. According to Dr. Kevorkian, “The voluntary self-elimination of individual and mortally diseased or crippled lives taken collectively can only enhance the preservation of public health and welfare” (Kevorkian). In other words, Kevor...
Physicians Assisted Suicide An Argumentative Essay Physicians Assisted suicide is a topic many people are not fully informed about. Physician assisted suicide, or PAS for short, is when a physician can legally prescribe medicine for a patient to take in order to medically kill themselves. I believe that PAS should be talked more about in order for more people to understand how bad or grave it can be to a family and to our world. PAS falls underneath the umbrella of euthanasia. ?
Physician -assisted suicide has been a conflict in the medical field since pre- Christian eras, and is an issue that has resurfaced in the twentieth century. People today are not aware of what the term physician assisted suicide means, and are opposed to listening to advocates’ perspectives. Individuals need to understand that problems do not go away by not choosing to face them. This paper’s perspective of assisted suicide is that it is an option to respect the dignity of patients, and only those with deathly illness are justified for this method.
“In 1999, Dr. Jack Kevorkian, a Michigan physician known for openly advertising that he would perform assisted suicide despite the fact that it was illegal, was convicted of second-degree murder” (Lee). The fact of the matter is human being...
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.
Assisted suicide brings up one of the biggest moral debates currently circulating in America. Physician assisted suicide allows a patient to be informed, including counseling about and prescribing lethal doses of drugs, and allowed to decide, with the help of a doctor, to commit suicide. There are so many questions about assisted suicide and no clear answers. Should assisted suicide be allowed only for the terminally ill, or for everyone? What does it actually mean to assist in a suicide? What will the consequences of legalizing assisted suicide be? What protection will there be to protect innocent people? Is it (morally) right or wrong? Those who are considered “pro-death”, believe that being able to choose how one dies is one’s own right.
Today a hot topic up for conversation is the right to assisted suicide. People are either for it because they can put aside their own feelings and can have respect for the dying. And then there are those that are against it because of their own religious or moral reasons. Either way there are two sides and phsycicans are also still divided on the topic. A lot of people question the competence of the terminically ill, many of which are in the final stages of their lives and request doctors to help them in exervising active euthanasia. For myself, it is sad to think those people are in such agony and sadness that to them the only hope of bringing that agony to a stop is through assisted suicide. Most recently was a women named Brittany Maynard, who at 29 years young was diagnosed with grade II Astrocytoma and was given 6 months to live and documented her last few months in youtube videos.
Euthanasia and assisted suicide is a rising controversial problem in the world. Many people are against the idea of helping someone 'kill themselves'. This is a problem because many people who have had fatal incidents and are left with chronic conditions live everyday in pain, mental suffering, and emotional suffering. Euthanasia and assited sucide is to help someone who no longer wants to live, pass on. A poll taken by CBS News asked respondents if they thought "a doctor should be allowed to assist the person in taking their own life" who "has a disease that will ultimately destroy their mind or body and they want to take their own life." About 56 percent of Americans said yes and 37 percent said no. This close tie of public opinion has been continuous throughout many years, but euthanasia and assisted sucide has not been legalized in the United States.