Although Dr. Jack Kevorkian was ultimately incarcerated for murder, his practices of euthanasia sparked interest in the idea of physician-assisted death. The general consensus of the public was his actions were malpractice due to the possibility of his patients not actually wanting to die. Assisted suicide arose from the remnant of Dr. Kevorkian’s infamy. In 1994, Oregon passed a law called Death with Dignity, which legalized assisted suicide. Although many people found the law to be a social breakthrough, the implications that have arisen exemplify how assisted suicide is too complex to be legalized. In essence, Death with Dignity is a misnomer. To imply that suicide is a dignified death is sickening and should be discouraged in society. The main argument supporters use to justify the act of assisted suicide is that the patients are in an unbearable amount of pain- so much pain that their life isn’t worth living. To counter that, every life is worth living. Many people who utilize Death with Dignity fear the possible loss of function of their limbs, or becoming incontinent, or being in pain until the last second of their life. Because of this, a common misconception has been used as further justification for assisted suicide. This misconception is there is a certain amount of grace in choosing when to die; however, there is more grace in accepting what is to come. Though supporters assert that Death with Dignity is not suicide, it is. Suicide is to kill oneself intentionally, which is precisely the action that Oregon physicians encourage. In conjunction, physicians who write prescriptions for the lethal medicine are killers because they provide the means of death. With all suicides, there is an infinite amount of possibilities th... ... middle of paper ... ...in order to submit a request for the prescription is to be 18 years old. Terminal illnesses and pain do not discriminate by age, though. A child can suffer as much than an adult, but is not allowed to utilize Death with Dignity; again, the law has failed. The prescription cannot be made more attainable due to how easily it can be abused, but at the same time, it needs to be more accessible because it eliminates a large group of people who may wish to use it. With the legalization of assisted suicide, a number of issues have arisen. The ethical standards of physicians seem to be in decline as they forget what exactly their role in society is. The shameless killing that is being allowed to occur will create an inevitable slippery slope, in which other crimes will be legalized. Dr. Kevorkian may have been imprisoned for his actions, but they soon may become acceptable.
The controversial act known as the physician aid-in-dying (PAD) challenges us to question our ethical, religious, and cultural values or beliefs. Although it is tragic and perceived as morally inappropriate, suicide is sometimes the only answer. In certain cases this act is a way to end excruciating pain and suffering. The state of Oregon passed a law known as the Death with Dignity Act in 1994. PAD is defined as “a practice in which a physician provides a competent, terminally ill patient with a prescription for a lethal dose of medication, upon the patient's request, which the patient intends to use to end his or their own life” (Braddock, and Tonelli). PAD also raises the question, is it a constitutionally guaranteed right for people to have the power and the medicine to take their own life? PAD, if operating under careful supervision, is an alternative to patients who may have to endure physical, mental, and financial struggles. Doctor Peter Goodwin, a physician from Portland, Oregon campaigned for the Death with Dignity Act, which he called his greatest legacy. Goodwin became a terminally ill patient towards the end of his life. Doctor Goodwin was 83 years old when he took the very medicine that he campaigned so long for. Goodwin was diagnosed with a rare brain disorder, which he had been battling for 6 years prior to PAD.
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.
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.
“On October 27, 1997 Oregon enacted the Death with Dignity Act which allows terminally-ill Oregonians to end their lives through the voluntary self-administration of lethal medications, expressly prescribed by a physician for that purpose.” (The Oregon Health Authority, 2010). Physician assisted suicide can be constructed to have reasonable laws which still protect against its abuse and the value of human life. Recent Oregon and U.K. laws show that you can craft reasonable laws that prevent abuse and still protect the value of human life. When one thinks of suicide, we think of a person who takes their own life. But in physician-assisted suicide, this is not the case. “In physician-assisted suicide, the patient self...
Death with dignity is a term to describe the process when terminally ill patients who are facing an imminent death choose to shorten the dying process and seek medication that would give them a peaceful and dignified death (Ubel). These patients do not want to die but find the dying process too painful and unbearable. Many of these terminally ill patients do not ingest the medication even after they’ve obtained it. However, they find great comfort in that option. For those who do take the medication, they are able to die in a way consistent with their beliefs and they are able to exercise the autonomy consistent with how they lived their whole life. Death with dignity should be legalized throug...
Once a patient meets all the qualifications, submits the requests to a physician, and is approved by two physicians the patient can move forward with this process. Typically a physician prescribes the patient a medication at a specific dose, essentially aiding the patient in overdosing. Once the patient receives the medication they are allowed to take it where they feel comfortable, though they are advised not to do so in public. Patients also must take the medication in the state they receive the medication in and reside in; if a patient takes their medication outside of the state they’ve been prescribed it in they will not be protected by law and their death will be ruled a suicide. One in three patients who receive their prescription end
In 1999 a well known physician, Jack Kevorkian, was convicted of second degree murder. One might think that Kevorkian committed the terrible crime of murdering someone, but that is actually far from the truth. Kevorkian was convicted because of something a little unusual; he helped a patient with assisted suicide. Alexander Stingl, a sociologist and science historian, and M. Lee, authors of “Assisted Suicide: An Overview,” define assisted suicide as “any case in which a doctor gives a patient (usually someone with a terminal illness) the means to carry out their own suicide by using a lethal dose of medication.” Kevorkian was convicted because as of right now, assisted suicide is illegal in the United States with the exceptions of Oregon, Montana, and Washington. Huge controversy rose over this case because some feel assisted suicide is a civil right whereas others feel it is unnecessary. Assisted suicide is a practice that has long been debated.
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....
The biggest problem above all in the debate over the ethics of physician assisted suicide is the sanctity of life. Whether the procedure is forced or chosen, the ultimate result is a death in an unnatural way. Not only is a life being taken, but the dignity of a person is as well. The term “death with dignity” is self-contradictory. Choosing to give up and take the easy way out is not an honorable effort. Also, for a physician to involve themselves in the death of another person, he or she is contributing to the devaluing of human life (Braddock
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.
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.
Although many people are familiar with the term “physician-assisted suicide,” very few however, actually know what is meant by the term. The term “physician-assisted suicide” is one that has been commonly used among the public as well as those who are in medical fields and discussed heavily throughout the medical literature. Physician-Assisted Suicide illustrates the process of prescribing medications that are often lethal in nature to patients who in return who take the self-administered doses without any outside help in order to end their life (Chin, Hedberg, Higginson, & Fleming, 1999). There have been states such as Washington and Oregon who have legalized Physician-Assistant Suicide. However, under the Washington and Oregon Death with Dignity Acts the term has been coined, “physician aid-in-dying (Chin, Hedberg, Higginson, & Fleming, 1999).” There have been much debate over what words to use but all seems to agree that it depends on how you feel about this issue and what side of the case you are on (Chin, Hedberg, Higginson, & Fleming, 1999).
Oregon’s Death With Dignity Act has opened the door to a private matter that had been handled privately between doctors and patients for years (Siegel). Euthanasia is withholding vital medicine or providing means for the patient to ease him or herself into death. Active euthanasia is when someone else injects lethal doses of drugs into the patient. Passive euthanasia is when someone provides the poison for the patient to kill him or herself. Death is a natural process, and it is a part of life. It is a time to come to terms with our selves, and our last chance to become our best selves. Besides, miracles happen every day, and this may be your big chance!
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.
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...