The Morality of Assisted Suicide
Deciding when to die and when to live is an issue that has only recently begun to confront patients all over the world. There is an elderly man lying in a hospital bed, he just had his fourth heart attack and is in a persistent vegetative state. He is hooked up to a respirator and has more tubes and IV’s going in and out of his body everywhere. These kinds of situations exist in every hospital everyday. Should physicians or doctors be allowed to assist patients, like this one, in death? Even though, physician-assisted suicide is illegal in the U.S., many doctors are helping suffering patients die. Physicians should not provide treatments that have a low chance of succeeding, such as respirators for patients in a permanent vegetative state.
Rita L. Maker, an attorney and executive director of the International Anti-Euthanasia Task Force, believes “the debate isn’t about the tragic, personal act of suicide, nor is it about attempted suicide…the current debate is about whether public policy should be changed in a way that will transform prescriptions from poison into medical treatment”(45).
Oregon is the only state that allows assisted suicide. A doctor will prescribe medication and the pharmacist will say “be sure to take all of these pills at one time-with a light snack or alcohol-to induce death”(45). The states insurance companies pay for the medication, which are paid for by Medicaid called “comfort care”(46).
“Whether other states embrace Oregon-style care will depend upon a willingness to carefully examine what truly is at stake in this debate…about public policy”(46). It
does not matter about your point of view on physician-assisted suicide; it’s the layout and...
... middle of paper ...
...oice to end their life they wouldn’t, but knowing they have a choice would put them at ease and when they think it is the right time to end their life they can do so, just like Rollins mother did. Rollins mother took the prescription when she felt most comfortable. Rollins concludes it by saying “times have changed…but ultimately, I can’t help these people the way I helped my mother. What I can do is join the fight to change the law. It’s going to be a state-by-state battle, and California is next up.
I am totally for physician assisted-suicide. Physicians should respect the wishes of their patients, even when the patient wants to die. Decisions about how to die are personal, private matters that the government should stay out of. Dying patients should have the right to choose a quick, painless death and doctors should be allowed to help them achieve it.
Currently, Oregon is the only state that has legalized assisted suicide. The Oregon statute, which came into e...
Assisted suicide is becoming increasingly more common. Arguing the topic is extremely hard because it means the the life or death of a human being. Today, assisted suicide is legal in multiple countries, but only a few states in the US support this. Therefore, creates a struggle for any person wanting to go through this process. Being this is a broad topic, most people are torn between one side, I personally believe there should be a compromise in between the middle. For instance, not just someone going through a troublesome time in their life should have the ability to up and kill himself. That in my perspective is taking an easy way out for something that is worth a tremendous amount. However, the few people with a deadly illness or cancer that can no longer fight the pain or perhaps unresponsive should be given that option. Just because we have the ability to be euthanized does
As a result, life-sustaining procedures such as ventilators, feeding tubes, and treatments for infectious and terminal diseases are developing. While these life-sustaining methods have positively influenced modern medicine, they also inadvertently cause terminal patients extensive pain and suffering. Previous to the development of life-sustaining procedures, many people died in the care of their own home, however, today the majority of Americans take their last breath lying in a hospital bed. As the advancement of modern medicine continues, physicians and patients are going to encounter life-altering trials and tribulations. Arguably, the most controversial debate in modern medicine is the discussion of the ethical choice for physician-assisted suicide.
I would not want my family to be forced to watch me suffer and be in excruciating pain twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. I would want to save my family from that and save them the burden of giving up their lives to take care of me and pay for all the medication that will never save my life. I rather give them many happy memories to live on with of me and the things we’ve done together. I would never want their last image of me to be in a bed dying in pain that can't be helped. I have seen way to many people suffer from an illness, that has no cure. I’m sure if they had a choice, they’d want the option of assisted suicide. I’d want to die happy and on my own terms and I feel that many people want that and should have the option for
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.
There is great debate in this country and worldwide over whether or not terminally ill patients who are experiencing great suffering should have the right to choose death. A deep divide amongst the American public exists on the issue. It is extremely important to reach an ethical decision on whether or not terminally ill patients have this right to choose death, since many may be needlessly suffering, if an ethical solution exists.
Physician-assisted suicide is defined as a physician providing either equipment or medication, or to inform the patient of the most available means, for the purpose of assisting the patient to end his or her own life. The people’s opinion support PAS according to a poll given in 1998. The majority 33% of people agreed that Physician assisted suicide should be made legal in a variety of circumstances, and 32% agreed with making it legal in select cases. (Gallup)
Terminally ill patients should have the legal option of physician-assisted suicide. Terminally ill patients deserve the right to control their own death. Legalizing assisted suicide would relive families of the burdens of caring for a terminally ill relative. Doctors should not be prosecuted for assisting in the suicide of a terminally ill patient. We as a society must protect life, but we must also recognize the right to a humane death. When a person is near death, in unbearable pain, they have the right to ask a physician to assist in ending their lives.
However, “The United States Supreme Court found that liberty as defined in the 14th Amendment does not include the right to assistance in dying” (Vacco v. Quill). It was later decided that the responsibility for determining whether assisted death should be legalized should belong to individual states. According to a report by CNN, in 1994 Oregon became the first state to legalize assisted suicide for terminally ill, mentally able adults. Today there are five states in which physician assisted suicide is legal. In Oregon, Vermont, Washington and California the option is given by each states individual laws. In Montana the patient must have a court decision. Oregon was the first state to pass the death with dignity act.
"Assisted Suicide: Finding Common Ground." Lois Snyder, JD; and Authur L. Caplan, PhD. Annals of Internal Medicine. March 21, 2000. v.132, n.6
As patients come closer to the end of their lives, certain organs stop performing as well as they use to. People are unable to do simple tasks like putting on clothes, going to the restroom without assistance, eat on our own, and sometimes even breathe without the help of a machine. Needing to depend on someone for everything suddenly brings feelings of helplessness much like an infant feels. It is easy to see why some patients with terminal illnesses would seek any type of relief from this hardship, even if that relief is suicide. Euthanasia or assisted suicide is where a physician would give a patient an aid in dying. “Assisted suicide is a controversial medical and ethical issue based on the question of whether, in certain situations, Medical practioners should be allowed to help patients actively determine the time and circumstances of their death” (Lee). “Arguments for and against assisted suicide (sometimes called the “right to die” debate) are complicated by the fact that they come from very many different points of view: medical issues, ethical issues, legal issues, religious issues, and social issues all play a part in shaping people’s opinions on the subject” (Lee). Euthanasia should not be legalized because it is considered murder, it goes against physicians’ Hippocratic Oath, violates the Controlled
Cotton, Paul. "Medicine's Position Is Both Pivotal And Precarious In Assisted Suicide Debate." The Journal of the American Association 1 Feb. 1995: 363-64.
Some feel that a terminally ill patient should have a legal right to control the manner in which they die. Physicians and nurses have fought for the right to aid a patient in their death. Many families of the terminally ill have exhausted all of their funds caring for a dying patient and would prefer the option of assisted suicide to bankruptcy. While there are many strong opposing viewpoints, one of the strongest is that the terminally ill patient has the right to die in a humane, dignified manner. However, dignity in dying is not necessarily assured when a trusted doctor, whose professional ethics are to promote and maintain life, injects a terminally ill patient with a lethal dose of morphine.
Lastly, I support the idea of legalizing euthanasia because the patients own their bodies, and they can do anything with it. Even though the doctor is the one who put the patient to death in a process of euthanasia, the patient is the one who makes the decision to be “killed”, and therefore, euthanasia is a type of physician-assisted suicide, which is not any of other people business.
Should a patient have the right to ask for a physician’s help to end his or her life? This question has raised great controversy for many years. The legalization of physician assisted suicide or active euthanasia is a complex issue and both sides have strong arguments. Supporters of active euthanasia often argue that active euthanasia is a good death, painless, quick, and ultimately is the patient’s choice. While it is understandable, though heart-rending, why a patient that is in severe pain and suffering that is incurable would choose euthanasia, it still does not outweigh the potential negative effects that the legalization of euthanasia may have. Active euthanasia should not be legalized because