The article discusses the tragedy of young Brittany Maynard, who was only 29 years old when she has to choose between, not life and death, but whether to prolong her suffering until the bitter end. Maynard was diagnosed with a terminal brain tumor that would kill her in a grueling, painful way. Unable to face her harsh reality, Maynard decided she would end her life on her own terms, when she felt “the time was right. “She did so through Physician-Assisted Suicide on November 1, 2014. The article labels her as one of the 750 people who have already taken advantage of Oregon’s “Death with Dignity” law, passed almost 2 decades ago. Like others who have taken her route to death, her passing was the subject of another Right-to-Die debate around the country, many opposing her decision to shorten her life even more than it already was. Advocates on the other hand strongly emphasize the right a dying person has to take their own life in order to cease their torment and anguish. The Oregon originating law, moreover outlines many guidelines for someone to be able to qualify to taking their own life with a physician’s recommendation, such as: being 18 or older, being a competent patient that possesses a …show more content…
It first describes the life-altering events that lead to Maynard choosing to end her life prematurely due to her debilitating illness that would deteriorate her body as the months went by. After explaining that Maynard succeeded in dying 3 days prior to the release of this article, it goes into depth of the arguments between advocates and those against her choice. It also lists the states and their requirements for permitting a terminally ill subject to end their own life with the help of their Physician. Using graphs and pictures enables the article to further explain the different matters and elements of the
Diane: A Case of Physician Assisted Suicide. Diane was a patient of Dr. Timothy Quill, who was diagnosed with acute myelomonocytic leukemia. Diane overcame alcoholism and had vaginal cancer in her youth. She had been under his care for a period of 8 years, during which an intimate doctor-patient bond had been established.
Brittany Maynard was a twenty nine year old woman who married her husband just a year before she passed away. Before she passed, she was diagnosed with a terminal disease, brain cancer. Her doctors gave her six months to live and using treatment might shorten her already short amount of time that she had left to live. Maynard and her family uprooted from their home in San Francisco, California and moved to Portland, Oregon. In Oregon, she planned to get new physicians and after attending appointments, she could be prescribed a lethal pill that would end her life. She wanted to live her last six months happily, and she didn’t want to suffer and have her family watch her suffer. (Death) She wanted to be able to end her life on her own terms, and not when the cancer says that she had to. She received a lot of unkind criticism for her choice. Death with Dignity Act, or the use of assisted suicide is morally justifiable, especially in Brittany Maynard’s
Both Brittany Maynard and Craig Ewert ultimately did not want to die, but they were aware they were dying. They both suffered from a terminal illness that would eventually take their life. Their worst fear was to spend their last days, in a state of stress and pain. At the same time, they would inflict suffering on their loved ones as their family witnessed their painful death. Brittany and Craig believed in the notion of dying with dignity. The states where they both resided did not allow “active voluntary euthanasia or mercy killing at the patient’s request” (Vaughn 269). As a result, they both had to leave their homes to a place that allowed them to get aid in dying. Brittany and Craig were able to die with dignity and peace. Both avoiding
In March of 1998, a woman suffering with cancer became the first person known to die under the law on physician-assisted suicide in the state of Oregon when she took a lethal dose of drugs. This law does not include people who have been on a life support system, nor does it include those who have not voluntarily asked physicians to help them commit suicide. Many people worry that legalizing doctor-assisted suicide is irrational and violates the life-saving tradition of medicine, and it has been argued that the reason why some terminally ill patients yearn to commit suicide is nothing more than depression. Physician Assisted Suicide would lessen the human life or end the suffering and pain of those on the verge of dying; Physician Assisted Suicide needs to be figured out for those in dire need of it or for those fighting against it. The main purpose of this paper is to bring light on the advantages and disadvantages of physician-assisted suicide and to show what principled and moral reasoning there is behind each point.
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.
America is a champion of the freedom of choice. Citizens have the right to choose their religion, their political affiliation, and make personal decisions about nearly every facet of their daily lives. Despite all of these opportunities, one choice society commonly ignores is that of deciding how one’s life will end. Death seems like a highly unpredictable, uncontrollable occurrence, but for the past 17 years, citizens of Oregon have had one additional option not offered to most Americans in the deciding of their end-of-life treatment. Oregon’s Death With Dignity Act (DWDA), passed in 1994, allows qualified, terminally-ill Oregon patients to end their lives through the use of a doctor-prescribed, self-administered, lethal prescription (Office of Disease Prevention and Epidemiology, n.d.). The nationally controversial act has faced injunctions, an opposing measure, and has traveled to the Supreme Court, however it still remains in effect today.
gotten to the point where they feel as if there is no point in living.
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....
My article, “Assisted Suicide: A Right or Wrong” by Claire Andre and Manuel Velasquez, discusses the importance of making assisted suicide something to consider when the patient is in pain and does not want to deal with the pain anymore. This article tells the very personal, detailed story of Matthew Donnelly and his time spent before he died. This article was written to open the eyes of people who are against assisted suicide to show them a case where the writers believe it would be acceptable to grant Donnelly’s wish and assisted him in ending his life. The purpose of this text is to be able to persuade the readers to see their point of view and hopefully get them to be for assisted suicide. The authors hope to achieve the well-assisted
For example, Brittany Maynard, a 29-year-old terminal cancer patient, stated while talking to a reporter about deciding to use euthanasia to end her life peacefully, “I will die upstairs in my bedroom that I share with my husband, with my mom and my husband by my side, and pass peacefully with some music I like playing in the background” (Dobuzinskis). Maynard wished only to be with the ones she loved most on her final day when she was finally going to be liberated from her misery. Without euthanasia, she would have had to continue to undergo many horrific days of excruciating pain, until her body could no longer take the pain, inevitably shutting down. Another example is from the American Civil Liberties Union, who articulates, “The right of a competent, terminally ill person to avoid excruciating pain and embrace a timely and dignified death bears the sanction of history and is implicit in the concept of ordered liberty” (ACLU). This further proves the point that all humans should have the undisputed right to chose their own death when capable to make the decision, which is given to them by simple human rights. Individuals should not be forced to sustain incredible pain without being allowed to end their ongoing agony; it is entirely
Physician assisted suicide (PAS) is a very important issue. It is also important tounderstand the terms and distinction between the varying degrees to which a person can be involved in hastening the death of a terminally ill individual. Euthanasia, a word that is often associated with physician assisted suicide, means the act or practice of killing for reasons of mercy. Assisted suicide takes place when a dying person who wishes to precipitate death, requests help in carrying out the act. In euthanasia, the dying patients may or may not be aware of what is happening to them and may or may not have requested to die. In an assisted suicide, the terminally ill person wants to die and has specifically asked for help. Physician-assisted suicide occurs when the individual assisting in the suicide is a doctor rather than a friend or family member. Because doctors are the people most familiar with their patients’ medical condition and have knowledge of and access to the necessary means to cause certain death, terminally ill patients who have made
In current society, legalizing physician assisted suicide is a prevalent argument. In 1997, the Supreme Court recognized no federal constitutional right to physician assisted suicide (Harned 1) , which defines suicide as one receiving help from a physician by means of a lethal dosage (Pearson 1), leaving it up to state legislatures to legalize such practice if desired. Only Oregon and Washington have since legalized physician assisted suicide. People seeking assisted suicide often experience slanted judgments and are generally not mentally healthy. Legalization of this practice would enable people to fall victim to coercion by friends and family to commit suicide. Also, asking for death is unfair to a doctor’s personal dogma. Some argue that society should honor the freedom of one’s choice to take his own life with the assistance of a physician; however, given the reasoning provided, it is in society’s best interest that physician assisted suicide remain illegal. Physician assisted suicide should not be legalized because suicidal people experience distorted judgments resulting in not being mentally equipped to make such a decision, people who feel they are a burden to their family may choose death as a result, and physicians should not have to go against their personal doctrines and promises.
In the documentary, How to Die in Oregon, the debate over assisted suicide is analyzed through the lens of multiple individuals who are terminal, most of whom are strongly considering use of the life ending medication. At the time of the documentaries release in 2011, only a handful of places in the world legalized assisted suicide, and Oregon was the only state to allow assisted suicide—helping over 500 terminally ill patients from 1994-2011. The documentary presents the benefits of offering legal assisted suicide. This is mainly accomplished through an emotional appeal, but also uses logic to support the emotional testimonies.
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.
"Legalized Physician-Assisted Suicide in Oregon ñ The Second Year." Amy D. Sullivan, Katrina Hedberg, David W. Fleming. The New England Journal of Medicine. February 24, 2000. v.342, n.8