Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The debate surrounding euthanasia
Is euthanasia justified debate
Physician assisted suicide controversial issue
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The debate surrounding euthanasia
In 1983 twenty-five-year old Nancy Cruzan was driving when her car careened off the road and flipped over. She was thrown out of her car into a ditched and was left lying there unconscious. Her body was victim to its surroundings and to fate. When she was found by paramedics, she was unconscious and not breathing. They concluded that she had not been breathing for at least fifteen minutes, but through the miracles of modern technology she was revived into a vegetative state (Gumm). This began a long crusade for Nancy Cruzan and her family and only added to the enduring debate about euthanasia. Should a person be able to control when to end his life? I believe that a person should control when life ends while facing a terminal illness or when death is unavoidable. In Nancy Cruzan’s circumstance, the decision of death depended upon her family. This specific situation is an example of why the debate continues. It continues to linger partly due to the fact that euthanasia covers a variety of practices.
When people are talking about euthanasia they are usually referring to one of these practices: the right to refuse treatment, passive euthanasia (under certain circumstances, family members request that life-sustaining machines or treatment be stopped for patients with little or no hope of regaining consciousness), physician-assisted suicide, or a patient may request his or her physician to administer powerful drugs such as morphine to ease unbearable pain and suffering, knowing that these drugs are also likely to bring death more quickly (Euthanasia-Reading). Nancy Cruzan was in a persistent vegetative state. After the accident, the doctors and Nancy’s family worked tirelessly to restore her to a conscious state. This continued for ...
... middle of paper ...
...ked, nor suggest any such counsel” (Collier). This will continue to be an ongoing debate and people in these situations should not have to wait extended periods of time because of gray areas in the law for a decision. I do not take euthanasia lightly, but I do believe that the choice should belong to the individual or in cases like Nancy’s to the family.
Works Cited
"ASSISTED SUICIDE LAWS STATE BY STATE." Euthanasia.com. N.p., 2011. Web. 22 Feb 2011.
Collier, P.F. "OATH OF HIPPOCRATES, Cerca 400 B.C.." 38. (1910): n. pag. Harvard Classics. Web. 22 Feb 2011.
Corbin, Clark. "Senate Panel Advances Assisted Suicide Bill." Post Register 17 Feb. 2011: A1. Print.
"Euthanasia-Reading." (2005): n. pag. Deliberating in a Democracy. Web. 22 Feb 2011.
Gumm, Carrie. "The Legacy of Nancy Cruzan." University of Virgina Health System (2004): n. pag. Web. 22 Feb 2011.
Assisted suicide and euthanasia is a controversial issue all over the world, and it leads to debate as to whether or not an individual should be allowed to decide the moment and form of one’s death, along with the
The Death with Dignity Act was passed in Oregon in 1994, and it is another option for dying with those who have terminal diseases. These people that want to die with dignity have to be seen by at least two doctors and have six or less months to live. While making the decision to use this act, the patient must be in a safe mental state to be making this decision. Currently, Oregon, Washington, Vermont, and soon to be California are the only states to carry the Death with Dignity Act. (Death)
According to Gamliel (2012), euthanasia refers to actions or omissions that result in the death of a person who is already gravely ill. Techniques of active euthanasia range fro...
Another reason a patient may opt to euthanasia is to die with dignity. The patient, fully aware of the state he or she is in, should be able choose to die in all their senses as opposed to through natural course. A patient with an enlarged brain tumor can choose to die respectively, instead of attempting a risky surgery that could leave the patient in a worse condition then before the operation, possibly brain-dead. Or a patient with early signs of Dementia or Alzheimer’s disease may wish to be granted euthanization before their disease progresses and causes detrimental loss of sentimental memories. Ultimately it should be the patient’s choice to undergo a risky surgery or bite the bullet, and laws prohibiting euthanasia should not limit the patient’s options.
Currently, in the United States, 12% of states including Vermont, Oregon, and California have legalized the Right to Die. This ongoing debate whether or not to assist in death with patients who have terminal illness has been and is still far from over. Before continuing, the definition of Right to Die is, “an individual who has been certified by a physician as having an illness or physical condition which can be reasonably be expected to result in death in 24 months or less after the date of the certification” (Terminally Ill Law & Legal Definition 1). With this definition, the Right to die ought to be available to any person that is determined terminally ill by a professional, upon this; with the request of Right to Die, euthanasia must be
Imagine, if you will, that you have just found out you have a terminal medical condition. Doesn’t matter which one, it’s terminal. Over the 6 months you have to live you experience unmeasurable amounts of pain, and when your free of your pain the medication you’re under renders you in an impaired sense of consciousness. Towards the 4th month, you begin to believe all this suffering is pointless, you are to die anyways, why not with a little dignity. You begin to consider Physician-Assisted Suicide (PAS). In this essay I will explain the ethical decisions and dilemmas one may face when deciding to accept the idea of Physician-Assisted Suicide. I will also provide factual information pertaining to the subject of PAS and testimony from some that advocate for legalization of PAS. PAS is not to be taken lightly. It is the decision to end one’s life with the aid of a medical physician. Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary states that PAS is “Suicide by a patient facilitated by means (as a drug prescription) or by information (as an indication of a lethal dosage) provided by a physician aware of the patient’s intent.” PAS is considered, by our textbook – Doing Ethics by Lewis Vaughn, an active voluntary form of euthanasia. There are other forms of euthanasia such as non-voluntary, involuntary, and passive. This essay is focusing on PAS, an active voluntary form of euthanasia. PAS is commonly known as “Dying/Death with Dignity.” The most recent publicized case of PAS is the case of Brittany Maynard. She was diagnosed with terminal brain cancer in California, where she lived. At the time California didn’t have Legislative right to allow Brittany the right to commit PAS so she was transported to Oregon where PAS is legal....
1) “Death with Dignity” is a famous slogan repeated constantly in the euthanasia debate and in this film. Try your best to be charitable: what do you think is meant by this? What does it imply about “life with dignity”? Do you think “total dependency comes at the expense of intimacy”?
There is great debate in this country and worldwide over whether or not terminally ill patients who are experiencing great suffering should have the right to choose death. A deep divide amongst the American public exists on the issue. It is extremely important to reach an ethical decision on whether or not terminally ill patients have this right to choose death, since many may be needlessly suffering, if an ethical solution exists.
Oftentimes when one hears the term Physician Assisted Suicide (hereafter PAS) the words cruel and unethical come to mind. On October 27, 1997 Oregon passed the Death with Dignity Act, this act would allow terminally ill Oregon residents to end their lives through a voluntary self-administered dose of lethal medications that are prescribed by a physician (Death with Dignity Act) . This has become a vital, medical and social movement. Having a choice should mean that a terminally ill patient is entitled to the choice to pursue PAS. If people have the right to refuse lifesaving treatments, such as chemo and palliative care, then the choice of ending life with PAS should be a choice that is allowed.
“Michael Manning, MD, in his 1998 book Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide: Killing or Caring?, traced the history of the word euthanasia: ‘The term euthanasia.originally meant only 'good death,'but in modern society it has come to mean a death free of any anxiety and pain, often brought about through the use of medication.” It seems there has always been some confusion and questions from our society about the legal and moral questions regarding the new science of euthanasia. “Most recently, it has come to mean'mercy killing' — deliberately putting an end to someone’s life in order to spare the individual’s suffering.’” I would like to emphasize the words “to spare the individual’s suffering”.
...neficiaries of the liberty interest here” (Smith 5). The Court’s ruling for euthanasia is broad and non-specific, allowing euthanasia for the “seriously impaired,” which though it claims to be beneficial to patients, could be applied to treatable conditions. Like the existing laws and the information advertised to the public on saving money, euthanasia advocates are not specific, and they do not tell the whole story of an issue that could costs lives and increase trauma to families.
Do people have the right to die? Is there, in fact, a right to die? Assisted suicide is a controversial topic in the public eye today. Individuals choose their side of the controversy based on a number of variables ranging from their religious views and moral standings to political factors. Several aspects of this issue have been examined in books, TV shows, movies, magazine articles, and other means of bringing the subject to the attention of the public. However, perhaps the best way to look at this issue in the hopes of understanding the motives behind those involved is from the perspective of those concerned: the terminally ill and the disabled.
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.
Euthanasia is a serious political, moral and ethics issues in society. People either strictly forbid or firmly favor euthanasia. Terminally ill patients have a fatal disease from which they will never recover, many will never sleep in their own bed again. Many beg health professionals to “pull the plug” or smother them with a pillow so that they do not have to bear the pain of their disease so that they will die faster. Thomas D. Sullivan and James Rachels have very different views on the permissibility of active and passive euthanasia. Sullivan believes that it is impermissible for the doctor, or anyone else to terminate the life of a patient but, that it is permissible in some cases to cease the employment of “extraordinary means” of preserving
Euthanasia has been an ongoing debate for many years. Everyone has an opinion on why euthanasia should or should not be allowed but, it is as simple as having the choice to die with dignity. If a patient wishes to end his or her life before a disease takes away their quality of life, then the patient should have the option of euthanasia. Although, American society considers euthanasia to be morally wrong euthanasia should be considered respecting a loved one’s wishes. To understand euthanasia, it is important to know the rights humans have at the end of life, that there are acts of passive euthanasia already in practice, and the beneficial aspects.