The debate over whose decision it is to uphold a human life is one with a vast range of opinions. Some believe it should be up to God, whereas others assert that it is the right of an individual; however, the ultimate verdict rests in the hands of the government. When tragedy leaves a victim in critical condition with no assurance of recovery, circumstances do not allow for a straightforward action plan. In any state of affairs, it is optimal to continue the life of a patient, even if it seems as though the ideal solution is death. Medical practitioners, relatives, and patients themselves do not deserve the pressure to decide this grave fate. The choice between life and death should not exist. Every human is entitled to the right to live, and …show more content…
Medical workers and healthcare officials regard the practice with thoughts that clash just as much as the rest of society. Moreover, placing the ability upon a doctor is completely inadequate. Not only does it put the doctor in an uncomfortable position, an assisted suicide case can easily trickle into the category of murder. A Dutch doctor, Henk Prins, faced criminal charges when he ended the life of a terminally ill infant, despite his pure intentions and approval from numerous physicians who agreed with his action. He had consent from the baby’s parents as well as evidence that she would only have a couple weeks to live, noting that no operation would improve her condition. After the infant’s life was ended through drug administration, Prins was convicted of murder (Worsnop, 1995, para. 151-152). The murky water surrounding assisted suicide has made it difficult for the action to be carried out legally, forcing virtuous doctors behind bars. Many state laws prohibit physician assisted suicide under broad conditions. Furthermore, even if one’s actions are permitted by state law, they are not necessarily protected by federal law, which declares that, “the state’s law against physician-assisted suicide [is] unconstitutional” (Worsnop, 1995, para. 5). Doctors play a vulnerable role when it comes down to the details, and …show more content…
Babies clearly cannot comprehend the situation they face. A child should have the opportunity to live and fulfill the life that they have been granted. Limiting one’s life simply because it currently does not promise prosperity is an action that cannot be pardoned. The proper measures must be taken to ensure the longest life possible for children. Babies who become extremely ill at a young age deserve the opportunity to have a life. The chance that their lives may be hindered by the strain of medical attention and complications does not vindicate the choice that they should die, because there is hope for a prosperous outcome. According to Kathlyn Gay, assisted suicide “…ignores the possibility that a person’s life might be improved…” (Gay, 2016, para. 2). By eliminating the chance of proceeding any further, there is no way to know what could have resulted, and that is what makes the choice of death morally wrong. Regardless of age, it is unfair to terminate a life when one is incapable of expressing his or her aspirations on the
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysShow More
Assisted suicide should be legalized nationwide in the United States, because every human deserves a peaceful death. Assisted suicide is when person that has been told they are terminally ill and won’t survive, they can go to a doctor and get prescribed a medication that results in death. It’s not murder, it’s giving the person a chance to say their good byes and leave this world when they are ready to go. Not making them suffer and go on when they don’t want to.
The most argued issue with assisted suicide is grounded in morals and religion. The sanctity of life is the philosophy that human life is sacred and should be protected from any form of v...
Euthanasia is the fact of ending somebody’s life when assisting him to die peacefully without pain. In most cases, it is a process that leads to end the suffering of human beings due to disease or illness. A person other than the patient is responsible for the act of euthanasia; for example a medical provider who gives the patient the shot that must kill him. When people sign a consent form to have euthanasia, it is considered voluntary, involuntary euthanasia is when they refuse. When people are not alert and oriented they are not allowed to sign any consent including the consent to euthanasia. When euthanasia is practiced in such situation, it is a non-voluntary euthanasia. In sum, people who practice voluntary euthanasia in honoring other
...le pain to both the patient and to their families. One procedure, known as Physician-Assisted suicide, alleviates suffering by having a physician provide a patient the means to painlessly kill him or herself. This procedure however, remains controversial and illegal in many states. This is unfair to patients who wish to be assisted in seeking death and escaping their terminal illness. Despite all of the benefits that are brought about because of Physician-Assisted suicide, people across America still seek to ban the practice because it clashes with personal moral and ethical beliefs. Although many people disagree with the procedure of Physician-Assisted suicide, it should still become legal because it alleviates suffering, allows patients to die in a dignified manner, and allows people to take control of the ultimate choice, death, away from their terminal illness.
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.
¨ If I cannot give my consent to my own death, whose body is this? Who owns my life?- Sue Rodriguez. If one cannot choose when they die and how they go out, then are we really the owner of our life and body? Physician assisted suicide is the practice of providing a competent patient with a prescription for medication for the patient to use with the primary intention of ending his or her own life. When the patient is terminally ill and is in a lot of pain they should be able to end their own life instead of waiting for it to end itself. Even though some argue that physician assisted suicide is not a humane way of dying it still stops the patient´s suffering and gives them peace of mind.
“If you truly believe in the value of life, you care about all of the weakest and most vulnerable members of society.” This thought-provoking quote by Joni Eareckson Tada conveys a sense of obligation held by society to take up the roles of caretakers for the ones that cannot aid their own health. In the relativity of physician-assisted suicide, the word “care” in the previous statement is defined by helping those in need, in this case, pertaining to health issues with a potentially terminal outcome. When analyzing this controversial subject, one must consider all aspects of the medical context as well as the ethical conviction that pairs with it. Should terminally ill patients have the right to a physician-assisted suicide simply to protect their civil liberties? Or is this option just a devised method opposing the purpose of doctors and physicians and the morals of civilization playing the role of a scapegoat and devaluing human life? Although on the surface, physician-assisted suicide for patients in critical condition appears to be a plausible remedy, when further inspected, a practical perspective arises saying this so-called final solution is morally and ethically wrong considering the responsibility of medics, society, and law makers.
In recent years the media has shifted more focus on the hot topic of physician assisted suicide. This expanded coverage has caused an ever widening gap on both sides of the debate because of the ethical concerns that come along with this act. Due in part to the advancements in modern medicine, assisted suicide should be viewed as a morally correct decision for individuals to make for themselves when there is no overcoming a life impairing mental or physical ailment. This form of medicine should only be used when the individuals have exhausted all possible procedures and options and the have a bleak chance on being healthy once again. The results of assisted suicide can be viewed as morally correct in regards to consequentialism, social contract theory, as well as deontological ethics. The act of assisted suicide can be viewed as selfless if one does not ultimately want to be a physical or monetary burden on other individuals. A patient can also help to save others in regards of organ donations. We as a country need to learn to observe the choices of the terminally ill patients and understand when they want to concede in their battle. If a person chooses to end their life, it should not be viewed as a sign of weakness, but rather as a statement that this individual does not want to suffer anymore.
Suicide and assisted suicide is often viewed as the most logical choice when faced with these circumstances. As far back as the 16th Century, people have been arguing for the terminally ill to be aided in ending life by physicians who should not be held morally or legally to blame for assisting the individual. The beginning of the 21rst Century saw many bills supporting the use of euthanasia proposed in many Western legislatures with little to no success. The fact is that everyone is going to die, the only question that remains to be answered is when, how, and under what conditions. Supporters of euthanasia state that everyone should have the same degree of control in choosing the circumstances surrounding their death as they do in choosing the manner in which they live” (Economist.com, 1997) I agree with this assertion, everyone should be able to choose their own
In the discussion of physician assisted suicide, one controversial issue has been whether or not it should become legal across the United States. On one hand, some oppose that it is not right for individuals to take their own life, with a physician 's help. On the other hand, if you are terminally ill and in a lot of pain, you should have the right to end your life with the help of a physician or someone else 's help. My view of the topic is that I am for allowing those people who are terminally ill to end their life to quit their suffering. However, people someone should check to see if the law is safe. If the law is not safe, then they should take the time to make it safe. Maybe there needs to be some arrangements that need to be fixed or adjusted.
Seattle, WA has a high rate of suicide and depression. Also Korea, which is my home country, is ranked on 2nd place on suicidal rate in the world. According to Korean Governmental Statistical Office, the leading cause of death of teenage group to 30th is a suicide which tells it is a big problem. Unemployment, depression, and social isolation are common reasons of committing suicide. Also in some of the East Asian countries, the hard pressure from studying and getting good grade for the college is one of the biggest reason of the suicide in teenage group, and that’s the reason why a lot of students in Korea committing or thinking about a suicide after the high school senior’s final test. Most of people kill themselves because of environmental factors so most of them think that they are victim who are damaged by social problems but I believe that committing suicide should be a criminal offense.
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.
The authors of “Assisted Suicide: A Right or a Wrong?" say that allowing people to assist in killing and destroying lives, along with devaluing human life, in a society that swears to protect and preserve all life, violates the fundamental moral society has to respect all human life. Once we devalue life, and say a certain quality of life isn’t worth living for a person, where will it stop? If assisted suicide is allowed for the terminally ill, society will start to accept and even presume that those with terminally ill conditions should end their life. The start of this divide assisted suicide can create is exemplified by Ben Mattlin. Mattlin has an incurable disease called spinal muscular atrophy. He was not expected to live into adulthood, yet has survived and now has two children of his own. “I could easily convince anyone that suicide is a rational option for me...and that scares me. Why shouldn’t I have the same barriers protecting me from moments of suicidal fantasies as everyone else has?” (Mattlin). This stresses the danger, as a society, that is posed to those with terminal conditions who want to live. Assisted suicide though seems to almost encourage ill people to end their lives. This is emphasized in the article “Assisted Suicide: A Right or a Wrong?", explaining that if assisted suicide is legalized on the basis of compassion and mercy that society could start assisting “and
The right to life has been a subject of controversy for decades. We can mention it when we talk about abortion, the death penalty, and simply by a natural process we allow such as the simple act of natural birth of a baby. Whether a life is worth living? and whether to assist the act to end a life? Has been one of the most controversial subjects among the religious communities and the society. According to the Louis Finkelstein Institute for Religious and Social Studies reported on its website in the document "Physician-Assisted Suicide Survey," (accessed on Oct. 27, 2006), "Religious identity correlates with attitudes toward the ethical status of assisting in suicide. Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox Jews believe in the majority that it