Since the FDA does not monitor tattooing and regulations can vary from state to state, in 1992 the tattoo industry created the Alliance of Professional Tattooist (APT), a non-profit organization to address the issues of tattoo health and safety. The APT attempts to monitor and standardize infection control procedures. It even gives several seminars a year on tattoo safety. However, membership is not required for a practicing tattooist and tattoo shops are not required to follow the same sterilization practices as other places that use needles, such as hospitals and doctors' offices (2). For places that do not follow these rules, the risk of infection is greater and can pose serious side effects to the person getting the tattoo.
All sides pose very solid and cohesive arguments with plenty of understandable points and respectable views. In America, there are quite a bit of people who fervently believe that physician assisted suicide should be legalized. However, only two states have legalized PAS; Oregon and Washington. These two states present very strict guidelines to those who request a physician’s assistance with suicide, making assisted suicide deaths a very rare occurrence while ensuring the safety of the patient. Oregon was the first to pass a law allowing PAS (Oregon Death with Dignity Act 1994), cautiously establishing a rigid line of protocol that must be followed before anyone goes through with suicide... ... middle of paper ... ...to PAS will always butt heads with those who find it to be unnecessary.
It should also the right of a competent patient to decide his own life, or death. If it is within an individual's rights to commit suicide it should be legal to ask for help if needed. Euthanasia is a serious issue and it will not disappear if ignored. The residents of every state have the right and privilege to vote on laws that effect them. Why is the law concerning euthanasia any different?
Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide should become legal in the United States and other areas of the world because patients should not have to live life with an unbearable pain and suffer the whole time through it. Although the terms euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are so much alike, there is a slight difference between the two terms as well as the action. In the general viewpoint, physician-assisted suicide involves the physician providing the medication to the patient at their request, and then the patient administering the medication themselves (“Washington” 40). On the other hand, Nele DeBal and colleagues define euthanasia as the physician giving the medication, for example a lethal drug, to deliberately end the patient to end the patient’s life. The process of euthanasia does not require the involvement of the patients giving themselves the drug (110).
If there is no hope and no cure to the ill, mercy killing is the last solution to release the pain. Moreover, doctors know the best for their patients, and euthanasia is one kind of medical treatments. However, other believe that take care of a patient is the doctor job not killing them. Euthanasia is a violation of one of the most important fundamental medical ethics in the words of the International Code of Medical Ethics, which is: "A physician shall always bear in mind the obligation to respect human life." There are a lot of alternative treatments and drugs to reveal the pain for the patient, so killing is not the only solution.
There are many arguments both for and against the ethicality, legality, and constitutionality of assisted suicide. The following pages will attempt to validate some of the pro-assisted suicide arguments, refute some of the opposing arguments, and show the current legal landscape pertaining to assisted suicide in the United States of America. Pro-Assisted Suicide Arguments People that are terminally ill should have the legal right to decide to end their suffering and physicians should have the legal right to assist them. Why as a people do we see it as morally wrong to end a terminally ill patients suffering, yet at the same time we see it as morally wrong to allow a terminally ill pet to suffer? It makes absolutely no sense in the scheme of things.
The Debate on Whether Assisted Suicide is Ethical or Immoral Assisted Suicide, also known as mercy killing, occurs when a physician provides the means (drugs or other agents) by which a person can take his or her own life. This assistance is one of the most debated issues today in society followed by abortion. Physicians are frequently faced with the question of whether or not assisted suicide is ethical or immoral. Although assisted suicide is currently illegal in almost all states in America, it is still often committed. Is assisted suicide ethical?
In conclusion, the most crucial point of the doctor-assisted suicide law is "Who would it protect?" It is clear that the best effect of the doctor-assisted suicide law is in its ability to give some advantages to all dying patients. Therefore, although it has been argued that legalizing doctor-assisted suicide is harmful to terminally ill patients, counterproductive and violates the tradition of medicine, it is suggested that physician-assisted suicide be legalized in that this law will dramatically improve the current medical environment for dying patients. It is hoped that giving the informed choice of legalized assisted suicide will make terminally ill patients ' lives more meaningful.
A medical examiner from Oakland County, Michigan and three researchers from the University of South Florida have studied key characteristics of 69 patients whose suicides were assisted by Jack Kevorkian between 1990 and 1998. Their findings are published in the December 7 New England Journal of Medicine. Autopsies show that only 25 percent of Kevorkian's clients were terminally ill when he helped them kill themselves. "Seventy-two percent of the patients had had a recent decline in health status that may have precipitated the desire to die." However, "no anatomical disease was confirmed at autopsy" in 5 of the 69 people.
Physician Assisted Suicide should be a right to all terminally ill patients in America with the exception of those who have not and cannot speak for themselves. Laws can be made to prevent abuse of the privilege and insure protection of human life. Medicine should be used for both saving, prolonging, and ending lives. My Growth as a Researcher I learned a lot about researching while writing this paper. This paper helped me learn to find more creditable sources.