The right to assisted suicide is a significant topic that concerns people all over the United States. The debates go back and forth about whether a dying patient has the right to die with the assistance of a physician. Some are against it because of religious and moral reasons. Others are for it because of their compassion and respect for the dying. Physicians are also divided on the issue. They differ where they place the line that separates relief from dying--and killing. For many the main concern with assisted suicide lies with the competence of the terminally ill. Many terminally ill patients who are in the final stages of their lives have requested doctors to aid them in exercising active euthanasia. It is sad to realize that these people are in great agony and that to them the only hope of bringing that agony to a halt is through assisted suicide.When people see the word euthanasia, they see the meaning of the word in two different lights. Euthanasia for some carries a negative connotation; it is the same as murder. For others, however, euthanasia is the act of putting someone to death painlessly, or allowing a person suffering from an incurable and painful disease or condition to die by withholding extreme medical measures. But after studying both sides of the issue, a compassionate individual must conclude that competent terminal patients should be given the right to assisted suicide in order to end their suffering, reduce the damaging financial effects of hospital care on their families, and preserve the individual right of people to determine their own fate.
Currently, physician-assisted suicide or death is illegal in all states except Oregon, Vermont, Montana and Washington. Present law in other states express that suicide is not a crime, but assisting in suicide is. Supporters of legislation legalizing assisted suicide claim that the moral right to life should encompass the right to voluntary death. Opponents of assisted suicide claim that society has a moral and civic duty to preserve the lives of innocent persons. There is a slippery slope involving the legalizing assisted suicide. Concern that assisted suicide allowed on the basis of mercy or compassion, can and will lead to the urging of the death for morally unjustifiable reasons is understandable. However, legalization can serve to prevent the already existent practice of underground physician-assisted suicide if strict laws to ensure that the interests of the patients are primary are installed and enforced. When a patient asks for assistance in dying, their wishes should be respected as long as the patient is free from coercion and competent enough to give informed consent. The intent of this work is to examine the legalization of assisted suicide in Oregon and the Netherlands and to argue that assisted suicide is morally and ethically acceptable in theory despite some unintended consequences of its implementation.
Assisted suicide has been one of the most controversial topics encoded in society to this day. Everyone has their own side of the story to tell their opinion. This is a socially debated topic that, when it boils down to the point, it is all just someone making a decision, whether the choice is to end one’s life and agony, or to preserve their pain. This should be a choice that the victims decide for themselves. However, in the land of the free, only one state has voted to legalizing assisted suicide. I stand by the right to choose assisted suicide. Assisted suicide and Euthanasia should be the choice of the people falling victim to such actions. This paper will be showing supporting reasons why assisted suicide should be the choice of the one that lays victim to it.
Physician assisted suicide, also known as right to die has become a hot button issue within the last twenty years. The reason behind the interest is because in the “land of the free” known as America, that promotes independence and personal rights; it seems quite regressive to many to deny a person their right to die. After the 1997 Supreme Court decision which declined to nationally recognize assisted suicide, Chief Justice William Rehquist stated this issue best when he said we are “engaged in an earnest and profound debate about the morality, legality and practicality of physician assisted suicide as it should in a democratic society”(Karim Paragraph 10). Cut to 2014 and over ten years later this issue has gained more momentum than ever, specifically in California after the California Compassionate Choices Act following the passing and implementation of The Dignity Act in Oregon (Tucker 1611). The benefits of assisted suicide include an end in suffering for patients while saving their family from future debt and allowing their organs and the energy used to keep them alive to save others who can live a complete and healthy life. There is some personal and moral opposition to physician assisted suicide nationally, but the positives outweigh the negatives and California should take further steps in aiding and providing options for those dying.
Death remains as one of the greatest mysteries today. Even though dying is a natural part of existence, American culture is unique in the extent to which death is viewed as a taboo topic. Rather than having open discussions, we tend to view death as a feared enemy that can and should be defeated by modern medicine and machines. Many people fear their end of life care, dying, and what will come after death. Society has become institutionalized, therefore most people die in a place with many health professionals. One main controversy over the last few decades are whether or not people should be able to choose when they die with assistance from a physician. Physician assisted suicide is the voluntary termination of one's own life by administration of a lethal substance with the direct or indirect assistance of a physician. Physician-assisted suicide is the practice of providing a competent patient with a prescription for medication for the patient to use with the primary intention of ending his or her own life. There are some people that are strong advocates and others that do not agree at all.
Analysis of the Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide Debate This essay leaves no rock unturned in its analysis of the debate involving euthanasia and assisted suicide. Very thorough definitions are given for both concepts - with examples that clarify rather than obscure the reader's understanding. Euthanasia is the intentional causing or hastening of death in a person with a medical condition that is judged to be serious. The patient may either be (a) alert and (b) aware and (c) competent to make their own decisions and (d) able to communicate or the patient may have (a) decreased alertness (due to encephalopathy or coma), (b) diminished awareness (retardation, dementia, vegetative state) and (c) be incompetent to make their own decisions or (d) be unable to communicate due to aphasia, or inability to speak.
Despite the changes in modern medicine, the attitudes toward assisted suicide in America’s courts and legislatures have not altered considerably. For instance, in June 1997, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that people do not have a constitutional right to assisted suicide. Although a constitutional right was not established, the ruling did not preclude states from passing laws prohibiting or permitting assisted suicide. However, similar to its status 130 years ago, assisted suicide is not widely supported in America’s state legislatures. As of 1997, physician-assisted suicide was legal in only one state—Oregon. Moreover, that law faced challenges from right-to-life opponents and the Justice Department, which w...
So what options are out there? You are a terminally ill patient drowning in debt and unable to pay the bills. But, you have a choice to stop the treatments that have no significant effect on you, or do you keep suffering? So let’s say you decide to end this agony, you know the inevitable is coming, but you want to take charge of your own death. Although the state you live in does not support your decision and only gives the option of lying in your death bed on life support. This research paper examines, if assisted suicide should be allowed in all states? Within this essay, will be points about why someone would choose to end their life, what states have legalized assisted suicide, pros and cons, and why this topic should be more talked about. Evidence will be gathered from, written sources. Sources that will likely be scholarly-reviewed journals, magazine articles and other articles from a religious viewpoint along with a doctor, family, and the patient’s viewpoint. The public should be more informed of the pros and cons to assisted suicide and which one has the greatest benefit for the patient and their families.
Physician -assisted suicide has been a conflict in the medical field since pre- Christian eras, and is an issue that has resurfaced in the twentieth century. People today are not aware of what the term physician assisted suicide means, and are opposed to listening to advocates’ perspectives. Individuals need to understand that problems do not go away by not choosing to face them. This paper’s perspective of assisted suicide is that it is an option to respect the dignity of patients, and only those with deathly illness are justified for this method.
Rose, T. (2007). Physician-assisted suicide: Development, status, and nursing perspectives. Journal Of Nursing Law, 11(3), 141-151.