Assisted suicide is a very controversial topic in American society that must be dealt with. In assisted suicide, a patient who is terminally ill requests the doctor to administer a lethal dose of medication to end his life. Assisted suicide brings up many moral and legal issues regarding the right of a patient to die with respect and the duties of a doctor. This issue is divided among people who believe that doctor assisted suicide is illegal and immoral and those who believe that suicide is a right that people have. Doctors who aid a patient to commit suicide are performing an illegal act and should be penalized to the full extent of the law.
Physician assisted suicide is immoral in the case of people who are alive and desire to terminate their life. However, there are extreme cases when hastening the dying process is justified in the circumstances of individuals who are in intense physical impairment.
... a crime with the risk of the loss of license or even imprisonment. The only sure way that people will stop suffering and be allowed to die peacefully because of their own decision is if assisted suicide becomes legal in the United States.
Although physician assisted suicide may result in the fulfillment of another’s choice, be considered a compassionate mean to end suffering, or even be considered a right, I believe it is not morally acceptable. In the act of physician assisted suicide, a patient voluntarily requests his or her doctor to assist in providing the means needed for self killing. In most cases of physician assisted suicide, patients who request this type of assistance are terminally ill and mentally competent (i.e. have sufficient understanding of an individual’s own situation and purpose and consequences of any action). Those who have committed the action of physician assisted suicide or condone the act may believe that one has the right to end their own life, the right of autonomy (the right or condition of self governing), the right to a dignified death, believe that others have a duty to minimize suffering, or believe it (physician assisted suicide) to be a compassionate act, or a combination of these things. However, since this act violates the intrinsic value of human life, it is not morally acceptable.
Pain is universal. In life, everyone will feel pain; it is inevitable and cruel. Physical or emotional, insignificant or severe, it is there. The pain continues mounting into an unbearable amount of suffering. Suffering that blots out everything of worth, such as family, love, aspirations, and optimism. Hopelessness seizes any will to endure. With no way to subside or control the pain, often one will go to extremes in order to be free of it. Many take their life, in order to escape the horror. Committing suicide is a traumatizing experience for any and all involved. Life is precious. The chance to live is only given once, and cannot be taken for granted. Preventing even a single life from ending early is imperative and obligatory to everyone. Suicide can never be an option. Why then is it acceptable as an alternative treatment for dire medical conditions? Physician-Assisted Suicides have a negative impact on those involved and is unethical.
Should physicians be able to assist patients who are terminally ill end their lives? Physician assisted suicide is a very controversial subject. In today’s society, people who commit suicide are known as “insane,” a person who takes prescription pills is known as a “drug addict” or “criminal.” However, when a doctor honors a patient’s request for a lethal dose of medicine, (which the patient will inject themselves) to end their life in peace is considered to be a murderer. However, when a physician unplugs a terminally ill patient who is on life support at the patient’s request is just doing their job. However, a person whose quality of life is nonexistent and are faced with a terminal illness should have the right to decide to seek physicians assistance.
One of the most controversial end-of-life decisions is “physician-assisted suicide” (PAS). This method of suicide involves a physician providing a patient, at his or her own request, with a lethal dose of medication, which the patient self-administers. The ethical acceptability and the desirability of legalization of this practice both continue to cause controversy (Raus, Sterckx, Mortier 1). Vaco v. Quill and Washington v. Glucksberg were landmark decisions on the issue of physician-assisted suicide and a supposed Constitutional right to commit suicide with another's assistance. In Washingotn v. Glucksberg, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the state of Washington's ban on physician-assisted suicide was not unconstitutional. Justices noted that while terminally ill patients on life support have legal right to refuse all treatment, terminally ill patients who are not on life support lack this right. Although the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a ban on physician-assisted suicide was not unconstitutional, individual states were free to enact laws permitting physician-assisted suicide. Not long after this ruling, Oregon passed adopted the Death with Dignity Act (DWDA) permitting physician-assisted suicide under certain conditions (State of Oregon 1995). More recently, Oregon's neighbor state Washington also enacted a law allowing physician-assisted suicide – the Washington Death with Dignity Act (State of Washington 2008) (Raus, Sterckx, Mortier 2).
It’s hard to recognize the outcome and have an objective view about certain issue without knowing what is its’ actual definition. The definition of physician-assisted suicide is “when a person - typically someone suffering from an incurable illness or chronic intense pain - intentionally kills him/herself with the help of a doctor. A doctor may prescribe drugs on the understanding that the patient intends to use them to take a fatal overdose; or a doctor may insert an intravenous needle into the arm of a patient, who then pushes a switch to trigger a fatal injection”( ETHICAL DEBATE: On the horns of a dilemma.）.
Euthanasia has always been defined as easy and gentle death especially in cases of painful and incurable illness. It has also been referred to as mercy killing of those considered hopelessly ill, incapacitated or injured patients. It is a matter of life and death. To medical practitioners the dilemma remains: prolong
What is a physician's duty to a patient? Are doctors ever justified in ending a life entrusted to their care, even at the request of the patient or his family? These questions are being asked in today's society as part of the growing debate surrounding physician-assisted euthanasia (PAS). Several well-publicized cases in the past few decades have only fueled the fire, inspiring equally convicted individuals and organizations to rise up on both sides. Pro-life advocates argue the immorality of assisted suicide, and are, except for a few instances, supported by the law. Pro-choice supporters not only cite ethical justification, but argue the practical benefits and recent legislation legalizing of some instances of euthanasia in limited areas of the world. Despite certain economic benefits and legal support, it is never justifiable for a doctor to facilitate the death of any patient.
“The doctor’s duty is to kill the pain, not the patient” (“Top 6 Reasons Physician-Assisted Suicide Should Not Be Legal”). The health department is seeking an easy way out instead of finding ways to cure the patient. A patient should be given help. That is the reason they go to a doctor, to get help. They do not go to a doctor’s office expecting to be killed. They go expecting help for a chance of survival. People fought for euthanasia to be legalized and used as a last resort and they are getting the opposite. It is cheaper for patient to undergo assisted suicide than for a treatment. A treatment that could take a long time or a short period of time. People should not be killed because it is an easier way out. It is inhumane to do that, everyone’s lives
Doctors prefer to never have to euthanize a patient. It is a contradiction of everything they have been taught for a doctor to euthanize someone, because a doctor’s job is to do everything in their power to keep the patient alive, not assist them in suicide. The majority of doctors who specialize in palliative care, a field focused on quality of life for patients with severe and terminal illnesses, think legalizing assisted suicide is very unnecessary. This is due to the fact that if patients do not kill themselves, they will end up dying on a ventilator in the hospital under the best possible care available, with people around them trying to keep them as comfortable as possible. Legalized euthanasia everywhere has been compared to going down a slippery slope. Officials believe that it could be done over excessively and the fear of assisted suicide numbers rising greatly is a great fear. This is why euthanasia is such a controversial subject worldwide. But, even though it is a very controversial subject, euthanasia is humane. Every doctor also has a say in whether or not they choose to euthanize a patient or not, leaving only the doctors who are willing to do this type of practice, for euthanizing patients. Medicine and drugs prescribed by a doctor for pain or suffering can not always help a person to the extent they desire, even with the help of doctors
Out of the fifty states in the United States, Physician Assisted Suicide (PAS) is only legal in five, while the practice of euthanasia remains illegal in all. Physician Assisted Suicide is when the physician provides the patient with lethal means that can be used by the patient at any time of the patient’s own choosing. On the other hand, the practice of euthanasia requires that the physician is the one who administers the lethal substances to the patient. Despite this technical difference, the two terms are often used interchangeably. Euthanasia and PAS provide relief to both those in mental and those in physical pain. As seen in countries around the world that have legalized euthanasia, with the proper restrictions, providing this procedure
The discussion of physician-assisted suicide is frequently focused around the ethical implications. The confusion commonly surfaces from the simple question, what is physician-assisted suicide? Physician-assisted suicide can be defined as a circumstance in which a medical physician provides a lethal dose of medication to a patient with a fatal illness. In this case, the patient has given consent, as well as direction, to the physician to ethically aid in their death (Introduction to Physician-Assisted Suicide: At Issue,
Euthanasia is the practice of knowingly ending a life in order to relieve pain and suffering. The voluntary end of one's own life by administration of a lethal substance with the direct or indirect assistance of a physician. There are different euthanasia laws in each country. The British House of Lords Select Committee on Medical Ethics defines euthanasia as "a deliberate intervention undertaken with the express intention of ending a life, to relieve intractable suffering". Assisted suicide is legal in Oregon, Vermont, Washington and New Mexico. Legalization is debatable in Montana due to a court decision which leaves the issue in doubt.