3) Patients in the most extreme pain are the most interested in physician-assisted suicide or euthanasia. 4) Euthanasia practices in the Netherlands prove that physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia will not get out of control here in America. (2-4) Emanuel dispels these myths one by one. In response to myth #1, he quotes the Hippocratic oath, which specifically opposes euthanasia. Emanuel claims that euthanasia was often provided at the time that the Oath was written.
Views on Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide This essay explores the views of doctors, of the general public, and of the original Hippocratic Oath on the practices of euthanasia and assisted suicide. Considerable reference material is employed - from professional sources. Regarding the views of physicians on euthanasia and assisted suicide, it is difficult to get a true picture of physicians views from articles in newspapers or from journal review articles. Since euthanasia and assisted suicide are new and a challenge to established values, a report about a single physician practicing assisted suicide is more likely to get published than a report that members of a large physicians' organization reaffirms traditional values. Physicians that practice euthanasia and assisted suicide have been more outspoken and vociferous since many consider themselves as pioneers.
Physician Assisted Suicide A poll in 1999 found that 52% of Americans though that Kevorkian should have been found guilty on some charge, while only 27% said that he was not guilty. The survey also found that 45% of Americans have a positive opinion of Kevorkian while 36% have an unfavorable one. After being informed that Kevorkian does not have a license to practice medicine and that he supports the right of doctors to help healthy patients die, his approval rating dropped to 19%, while his unfavorable rating rose to 57%. Public support for physician assisted suicide was confined to the limited situation where a terminally ill patient would ask a doctor for help to commit suicide. Fifty four percent thought that doctors should be able to give a lethal dose to these patients.
Numerous US studies have established that the Americans most directly affected by the issue of physician-assisted suicide -- those who are frail, elderly and suffering from terminal illness -- are also more opposed to legalizing the practice than others are: * A poll conducted for the Washington Post on March 22-26, 1996, found 50% support for legalizing physician-assisted suicide (Washington A18) Voters aged 35-44 supported legalization, 57% to 33%. But these figures reversed for voters aged 65 and older, who opposed legalization 54% to 38%. Majority opposition was also found among those with incomes under $15,000 (54%), and black Americans (70%). * An August 1993 Roper poll funded by the Hemlock Society and other euthanasia supporters indicated that voters aged 18-29 supported "physician-aided suicide" 47% to 35%; voters aged 60 and older opposed it 45% to 35%. Hemlock's newsletter commented that "the younger the person, the more likely he or she is to favor this legislation."
She states that there are situations where an ... ... middle of paper ... ...illnesses themselves. It is presented that in our society filled with medical tycoons the world would be a healthier place yet it is examined that the medical groups are part of the ones who are promoting assisted suicide to increase their profits since it is cheaper to effectively “pull the plug” than it is to keep someone alive through intervenes feeding tubes and life support equipment. This controversy does not seem to be going anywhere any time soon since there are those who oppose such bills being passed because of their views of it being a grave injustice to life, but there are also those who are on the other side of the argument who are fighting equally hard to present the facts of their side of beliefs. There will always be those who will seek out a way to end their suffering, and equally there will always be those to stand in the way of others decisions.
Wrapped up in complex reasonings of right and wrong assisted suicide tests people’s morality, psyches, and personal experiences. Many of the patients suffering from terminal illnesses could be repressed with the practice of good medicine, which our doctors often do not supply. If patients were to receive proper pain control, better comfort, and emotional support the requests for assisted suicide would significantly drop. Not only would the number of requests for assisted suicides go up if it were legal, if non terminal patients were allowed assisted suicides rates would double even triple. “Do we need to allow patients to kill themselves?
According to McCarthy (2014), who cited a Gallup News poll of the same year, seven out of ten Americans, despite religious convictions, back euthanasia (para. 1). In a study released by Emmanuel, and the American Medical Association (2001), support for or against euthanasia by the general public was greatly influenced by demographics and economic conditions, and was mostly mixed (p. 143). Attitudes of physicians and other healthcare providers are primarily mixed as well. Healthcare providers who specialize in oncology were likely to support euthanasia while healthcare providers in other specialties would only support euthanasia based on the patient’s circumstance (Emanuel, 2002).
(Vaughn, Page 603) In the 2007 Gallup Poll, results show 56% of the public believes when a person has a disease that cannot be cured and is living in severe pain, doctors should be allowed to assist the patient to commit suicide if the patients requests it and 38% believe it should not be allowed and 49% of the public believes that physician-assisted suicide is morally acceptable while 44% beli... ... middle of paper ... ...escribed Diane a lethal dosage of barbiturates for her to commit suicide. (Vaughn, Page 612) In effect, Dr. Quill gave approval in her decision to commit suicide and assisted in her suicide. He implied to Diane and her family that her decision was moral, rational and justifiable in her position, even though she had a 25% chance of surviving. However, those that had a great influence in Diane’s life and a solid reason for her to prolong her life, all supported her decision in what was understood to be her wish to die. Surely, if Dr. Quill refused to assist Diane with her death would she then have to decide to commit suicide without assistance or to try extend her life.
By having the knowledge gained by cloning, vast majority of severely sick people would be able to be completely treated. People are not aware and a lot of them claim that cloning is against the God’s will “"If your religious beliefs will not let you accept a cure for your child's cancer, so be it," argued California Democrat Zoe Lofgren. "But do not expect the rest of America to let their loved ones suffer without cure. "” (Gibbs, N., Goldstein, A., Cooper, M., & Duffy, M., 2001), 38.) However rescuing humanity from diseases requires a huge
Furthermore, people feel that legalizing doctor-assisted suicide will open the floodgates and lead to a slippery slope that will ultimately devalue the worth of human life and lead to doctors pressuring the terminally ill to request assisted suicide. The evidence tells a different story however. One Dutch research article found that those most often requesting suicide were terminal cancer patients (15%) and those who had a terminally progressive neurological disorder (8%) (Onwuteaka-Philipsen et al., 2010). The same article showed that of all the patients these doctors saw, only 7% asked for doctor assisted suicide/euthanasia and around only 2.4% of the patients actually received euthanasia/doctor assisted suicide (Onwuteaka-Philipsen et al., 2010). To be clear, active euthanasia is when a doctor actively does something that will end a patient’s life, like injecting the patient with a lethal dose of poison and passive euthanasia is when the doctor withholds treatment that could potentially save a patient, such as in the case of a do not resuscitate order.