Physician Assisted Suicide Summary

Individuals often debate whether physician-assisted suicide is morally right or wrong. According to the text, Oregon has a law that was passed in 1998 that legalized physician-assisted suicide (Timmons, 2017). This law allows competent individuals who have only six months or less left to live and that resides in Oregon to request a prescription from a physician that will end one’s life (Timmons, 2017). Michael Gill discusses objections to autonomy-based justifications of physician-assisted suicide. Individuals that are against autonomy-based justifications of physician-assisted suicide believe that the autonomy-based justifications of the law are irrational and absurd. One of the objections to autonomy-based justifications of physician-assisted suicide is that the autonomy-based justification implies that non-terminally ill individuals should also be given the option to commit suicide. The individuals that oppose this law thinks that giving everyone, including individuals that are not terminally ill, the option of physician-assisted suicide is irrational.

The first way he responds is based on a libertarian viewpoint. Michael Gill points out that a libertarian viewpoint is that everyone should have the option to make any decision for oneself that they want. In addition, their viewpoint is that whether it is morally right or wrong should not be legally relevant if no one else is harmed. The other way Michael Gill responds to the objections is by saying that the law is not implying that assisted suicide should be legal for non-terminally ill individuals. He also points out that physician-assisted suicide does not violate autonomy since a person that is terminally ill will lose their decision-making ability regardless if they commit suicide or not. Through the law that legalizes physician-assisted suicide, a terminally ill individual can decide whether to end their life through suicide or let the illness kill