I do not believe that it is ever ethically justified for physicians to give lethal injections to people, whether it is active or passive. Allowing physician assisted suicide (PAS) would cause people to have less faith in physicians. However, the issues that surround PAS are not only about death, they are about ones liberty, right to privacy and control over his or her own body. There are certain situations, which would be considered justifiable to others and I will present a few of them to you. However, I do not agree with PAS no matter what the case may be. The case concerning Tom Youk and Jack Kevorkian is an example of one of these situations. Although this is not a black and white issue, and the right action requires consideration of all applications and scenarios.
PAS could be considered ethical in certain situations to others. Compassion and beneficence are required. They are also desired; every caregiver wants to help his patient, deliver treatment with excellence, compassion, and the intent of beneficence. Doctors can be given a course to teach them the situations in which it would be ethical to perform a lethal injection to patients who request it. Tom Youk had Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS). Both, he and his family, requested active euthanasia from Jack Kevorkian. Violation of personal autonomy constitutes deprivation of freedom and, is in turn, in itself wrong. Everyone has the right to privacy and control over his or her own body. Does this apply all situations? I do not believe this is the answer. There is not a guarantee either way, but when would a patient ever have hope? The hope for amazing recoveries would soon fade among many in society. The treatment that has not been tried yet or treatment that may come in the future due to new technologies may never arrive. This perverts the medical profession. Not only will the doctor-patient relationship be severely damaged, but also the image of doctors as healers will be transformed. Suicide is a selfish act used as a permanent solution to a temporary problem.
Helping patients die contradicts the doctor’s healing role. The desire for suicide would result in failure of several doctors to adequately relieve pain and emotional suffering as death approaches. The technology of today has brought and is still bringing new cures everyday. PAS would lead to more “Doctor Deaths: in this world, which certainly is not necessary.
Webb, W. B., & Cartwright, R. D. (1978). Sleep and Dreams. Annual Review of Psychology, 29(1), 223-252. doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.29.020178.001255
Although physician assisted suicide may result in the fulfillment of another’s choice, be considered a compassionate mean to end suffering, or even be considered a right, I believe it is not morally acceptable. In the act of physician assisted suicide, a patient voluntarily requests his or her doctor to assist in providing the means needed for self killing. In most cases of physician assisted suicide, patients who request this type of assistance are terminally ill and mentally competent (i.e. have sufficient understanding of an individual’s own situation and purpose and consequences of any action). Those who have committed the action of physician assisted suicide or condone the act may believe that one has the right to end their own life, the right of autonomy (the right or condition of self governing), the right to a dignified death, believe that others have a duty to minimize suffering, or believe it (physician assisted suicide) to be a compassionate act, or a combination of these things. However, since this act violates the intrinsic value of human life, it is not morally acceptable.
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....
In the medical field, there has always been the question raised, “What is ethical?” There is a growing conflict between two important principles: autonomy and death being considered a medical treatment. Physician assisted suicide is defined as help from a medical professional,
The biggest problem above all in the debate over the ethics of physician assisted suicide is the sanctity of life. Whether the procedure is forced or chosen, the ultimate result is a death in an unnatural way. Not only is a life being taken, but the dignity of a person is as well. The term “death with dignity” is self-contradictory. Choosing to give up and take the easy way out is not an honorable effort. Also, for a physician to involve themselves in the death of another person, he or she is contributing to the devaluing of human life (Braddock
the decision to end their lives often turn to their physicians for advice. However, studies indicate that many physicians are unwilling to provide their assistance in suicide because it conflicts with their ethical beliefs and because it is illegal. The legalization of PAS is a sensitive, yet complicated, topic which is becoming more and more popular with America’s aging population and the terminally ill patients. PAS is a social issue which is here to stay. The legalization of PAS is continually being debated all over the United States and offers a potential for abuse. In 1994, PAS laws of Washington and New York were challenged in federal court and declared unconstitutional. Physician assisted suicide should not be legalized in any state.
Is physician assisted suicide morally right? This has been a controversial subject for some time now. People are wondering whether or not it is the most humane thing to do. If dogs can be putdown, why not people? The reason is in that question. They are people. Every life is important, no matter how long it may be. Instead of finding a way to get rid of people faster, the government could put those efforts in something more positive. If other people are considering whether or not the patients’ life is valuable, the patient could question it as well. Physician assisted suicide will put pressure on terminally ill people to die more quickly because it’s cheaper and because the patients may have low self-esteem.
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.
The concept of physician-assisted suicide has been a topic of debate since the birth of medicine. Controversy even surrounds its name as the term “suicide” is associated with a form of mental illness and irrational behavior, both of which are to be prevented it if at all possible according to medical obligation (Quill and Greenlaw). Physician assisted death/suicide occurs when a physician provides a medical means of death and instruction to a patient but does not administer the actual cause of death (Lonnquist and Weiss 389-91). This is quite different than the concept of active euthanasia in which a physician directly administers the cause of death. Recognized as far back as the 5th century BCE in the ancient Hippocratic Oath, the origin of this practice cou...
Oftentimes when one hears the term Physician Assisted Suicide (hereafter PAS) the words cruel and unethical come to mind. On October 27, 1997 Oregon passed the Death with Dignity Act, this act would allow terminally ill Oregon residents to end their lives through a voluntary self-administered dose of lethal medications that are prescribed by a physician (Death with Dignity Act) . This has become a vital, medical and social movement. Having a choice should mean that a terminally ill patient is entitled to the choice to pursue PAS. If people have the right to refuse lifesaving treatments, such as chemo and palliative care, then the choice of ending life with PAS should be a choice that is allowed.
The ethical issues of physician-assisted suicide are both emotional and controversial, as it struggles with the issue of life and death. If you take a moment and imagine how you would choose to live your last day, it is almost guaranteed that it wouldn’t be a day spent lying in a hospital bed, suffering in pain, continuously being pumped with medicine, and living in a strangers’ body. Today we live in a culture that denies the terminally ill the right to maintain control over when and how to end their lives. Physicians-assisted suicide “is the voluntary termination of one's own life by the administration of a lethal substance with the direct or indirect assistance of a physician” (Medical Definition of Physician-Assisted Suicide, 2017). Physician-assisted
Physician-assisted suicide refers to the physician acting indirectly in the death of the patient -- providing the means for death. The ethics of PAS is a continually debated topic. The range of arguments in support and opposition of PAS are vast. Justice, compassion, the moral irrelevance of the difference between killing and letting die, individual liberty are many arguments for PAS. The distinction between killing and letting die, sanctity of life, "do no harm" principle of medicine, and the potential for abuse are some of the arguments in favor of making PAS illegal. However, self-determination, and ultimately respect for autonomy are relied on heavily as principle arguments in the PAS issue.
Fisher, C.J., Byrne, A., Edwards, and Kahn, E. (1970) REM and NREM nightmares. In E. Hartman (ed), Sleep and Dreaming. Boston : Little Brown
Usually when you end up drifting off to sleep, you fall into a deep sleep and begin to experience a so called dream.” However, most children, and even some adults, experience some even more terrifying so called dreams. These dreams are called nightmares. Nightmares have been occurring in people’s sleep for hundreds of years. People have been interested in them for centuries and they have quite an interesting past to them.
What is a dream? Why do we have dreams? Do dreams have deeper meaning in our lives? The answers to these questions have eluded and intrigued many psychologists throughout history and have sparked my interest as well. As an avid and vivid dreamer I have often found myself wondering what the true meanings to my dreams were. So what are dreams? “Strictly speaking, dreams are images and imagery, thoughts, sounds and voices, and subjective sensations experienced when we sleep.”1 Even after thousands of years of research, psychologists have still not come to an agreed answer on why we dream. There are as many opinions out there as there are individual dreams. Some psychologists believe dreaming is simply the minds way of distracting itself from outside information during sleep to allow people to get deep rest. Others such as Dr. Eric Hartman suggest dreams serve almost as a psychotherapy in which the brain can make connections between different emotions and thoughts in a safe protected environment. Do dreams have any direct correlation to everyday events and experiences? Are they meant to aid individuals in understanding and interpreting their world around them?