Dying With Dignity On Tuesday, March 24, an elderly Oregon woman, acting with the aid of a doctor, dosed herself with potent chemicals and died. The woman had lived with breast cancer for more than 20 years. By all accounts her final hours were private and peaceful, as she became one of the first people in American history to end her life lawfully with the aid of a physician (Oregonian A1). She was able to end her life peacefully due to controversial legislation

gone? What are my options? For many years the only legal options were to try a treatment plan, palliative care, hospice, and eventually death. For residents of Washington State, Oregon, and Vermont there is another option. They have the option to end their own life with a prescription from their physicians. The Death with Dignity Act was approved by voters in Oregon in 1994 and was confirmed in 1997 when the law went into effect. It is a law that allows mentally competent, terminally-ill adults to

medical dictionary, death with dignity is defined as “the philosophical concept that a terminally ill client should be allowed to die naturally and comfortably, rather than experience a comatose, vegetative life prolonged by mechanical support systems” (Elsevier). Then we must ask ourselves; why is this death with dignity such a philosophical idea? Why must a person’s right to their own life be haltered and prohibited by the law? In most cases, the right of a dignified death with the help of a physician

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

intent to inform the public about this highly controversial subject. The Dr.’s explain the positive side in assisted suicide as, “Physician aid-in-dying is ethically justifiable” (Braddock and Tonelli). They write that people who are for assisted death are about respect, justice, compassion, individual liberty, and honesty for the sick and dying . The authors then explain that, on the other hand, “Physician assisted suicide is ethically impermissible” (Braddock and Tonelli). They give examples, that

LEGALIZATION OF ASSISTED SUICIDE IN THE U.S. 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

Euthanasia in Oregon Oregon is currently the only state that gives the terminally ill the right to decide how and when they want to die. This is known as “Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act” which lets ill, competent patients, who have less than six months to live, choose their preferred lethal dose of medication after they confer with two doctors. Since this right is present in only one state, it causes controversy. David Sarasohn in “No Last Rights” discusses Attorney General John Ashcroft’s

But not all people, and the Death with Dignity Act can provide relief for them,” (“Assisted Suicide” 2013). Death with Dignity is not for everyone. It may not even be for most people. But it is for some and they deserve the right to have control. I, personally, do not know what I would do if I were terminally ill. I have no

Physician-assisted suicide is legal in three of the fifty states in America: Oregon, Montana, and Washington. Getting approval for physician-assisted suicide in Oregon is a long process with many guidelines and restrictions. The patient must be terminally ill, with little hope for treatment and less than six months to live. It is required that they are a resident of Oregon, and at least 18 years of age. They must also be able to communicate their own wishes. Once the initial decision is made by the

National Hearing on Death with Dignity. The outcome of the hearing “Death with Dignity: An Inquiry into Related Public Issues” was an overwhelming annoyance caused by the use of the term, “medical miracle”. They felt as though it was ironic, the process of dying was only delayed and extended by a medical miracle and takes away from the quality of their life (Dowbiggin, 2003). Because of the present annoyance about using “medical miracles” as an excuse to ignore the idea of Death with Dignity, not much was