Imagine being in unrelenting physical pain, slowly approaching an inevitable death while also fighting for the legal right to end your own life. Across the United States, unfortunate people may find themselves under these circumstances if they live outside of California, Colorado, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Montana, Maine, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Vermont, or Washington where assisted suicide is illegal.
What is assisted suicide?
Assisted suicide refers to the act of providing medical means to people with either terminal illnesses or incurable conditions who wish to end their lives. In contrast to suicide committed outside of the medical community, assisted suicide is a deliberate and regulated process that entails the help of qualified
…show more content…
People have the right to autonomy over their own lives and bodies. This means that people should have the freedom to make decisions about their own lives, including the decision to end their suffering. Assisted suicide provides people with the means to do so in a dignified and painless manner, allowing them to retain control over the end of their lives.
Another argument in favor of assisted suicide is that it can provide people with relief from intense physical and psychological suffering. In some cases, people may be faced with a terminal illness or chronic pain that cannot be alleviated, leading to a reduction in the quality of life. Assisted suicide provides an option to reduce suffering while also allowing for death with dignity.
What are the potential issues or concerns?
Some argue that it is the responsibility of healthcare providers to keep people alive and provide comfort and support in their final days. New physicians are sworn under the Hippocratic oath to uphold ethical standards and “do no
…show more content…
Financial or emotional pressure can influence a patient’s decision when it isn’t best for themselves, but for friends and family. This example can be seen when married couples are forced into divorce to avoid the one spouse acquiring the debt of the other before death.
On the other hand, opponents argue that there is an alternative for people contemplating assisted suicide. These alternatives include palliative care and hospice services. These services aim to maximize the quality of life while also alleviating pain or mental issues. This can provide patients with comfort and support in their final days, without resorting to assisted suicide. However, this stance is irrelevant as assisted suicide can only be carried out when an individual has already rejected every alternative.
Although assisted suicide is aimed at reducing harm, there are unintended consequences to be wary of. If healthcare providers are ending the lives of patients, those opposed to assisted suicide will begin to lose faith and trust in the system. This may cause advice from medical professionals to be baselessly questioned and ignored. On the other hand, funding for hospice services may also see a decline as patients choose a different path. If hospice services are decreasing in quality, more patients could be encouraged and persuaded towards
Physician- assisted suicide can be thought of as helping a patient in carrying out their last days by providing the information and medication needed to end their life. The physician
She believes that it would be much easier to have a physician do it because they already have all the necessary means of performing the task. The physician could discuss the suicide with a psychologist, a social worker or a clergyman to make sure the patient truly wants the suicide. For now physician assisted suicide still depends on the patients state of health, but a new question arising is whether someone can have assisted suicide if they are just tired of life. If someone is tired of life because they have medical issues, but just not as severe as a terminal illness
In the Newsweek article, “Physician-Assisted Suicide Is Always Wrong,” by Ryan Anderson, it is stated that the legalization of assisted suicide “would be a grave mistake.” Anderson provides a few examples of why assisted suicide is detrimental. One, he states it leads to an endangerment of the weak and disenfranchised in societies. His outlook is that the purported safeguards of eliminating risk has mainly been nonexistent, which in some countries like the Netherlands who has legalized physician assisted suicide (PSA), has lead to doctors administering lethal injections to patients without request. Two, Anderson, sees assisted suicide as a compromise in the practice of medicine.
Chuc Tran T. Hollis-GInes ENG 101- Argumentative 23 October 2015 Physician-assisted Suicide The legalization of physician-assisted suicide has became an increasingly debatable topic in the United States today. The practice of assisted suicide pertains to a terminally ill patient who wants to end his or her life along with a physician’s acknowledgement of that patient’s desire to die.
It provides a competent patient with a prescription medication to use with the primary intention of ending his or her own life. Physician-assisted suicide has its proponents and its opponents. This procedure is not to be taken lightly. All patients pursuing PAS should be evaluated. It is required that “...a patient's request for assistance with a hastened death should generate a thorough evaluation of the patient's motives and attempts at ameliorating the patient's suffering”(NCBI).
Assisted death is a version of voluntary active euthanasia, which is different from the withdrawal of life-support, a passive type of euthanasia. The health professional prescribes the terminally ill patient a medication that will allow them to end their life immediately in an environment chosen by them. To date, physician-assisted suicide is legal in Vermont, Montana, Oregon and Washington and other places around the world. Concerning the debate over this issue, some individuals believe that patients considered to be terminally ill or in extreme pain have the right to decide their death, and in doing so, receive the help of a doctor. On the contrary, others argue that patients should not be allowed to choose death with the help of a health
One definition for physician assisted suicide is when a patient’s death is facilitated by a physician, who will enable the patient to perform a life-ending act through the supply of the necessary means or information. The very first initiative to legalize physician assisted suicide was in 1991, appearing on the ballot in Washington state. However, this attempt failed with voters turning it down by a slim margin. Then, after a lengthy legal process, physician assisted suicide was finally first legalized in Washington state in June of 1997. And to this day, only 9 states (Washington, Oregon, California, Hawaii, New Mexico, Colorado, New Jersey, Vermont, and Maine) plus Washington DC have legalized physician assisted suicide, with 1 state (Montana)
Assisted Suicide: A Controversial Topic Assisted suicide, also known as physician-assisted death (PAD), has been a topic of controversy for decades. While some argue that PAD should be legalized to grant terminally ill patients the right to die with dignity, others believe it goes against the sanctity of life. This essay will explore the arguments for and against assisted suicide and offer recommendations on how to approach the issue. PAD is Important
The recent legislative advancements concerning physician-assisted suicide have unveiled a series of controversial arguments regarding the right to die. As told by The Gale Encyclopedia of Public Health, “Assisted Suicide is a form of self-inflicted death in which individuals voluntarily bring about their own death with the help of another, usually a physician, relative, or friend. Assisted suicide is sometimes called physician-assisted death or PAD” (Frey 915). Four U.S. states now have legalized the practice of assisted suicide and other countries across the world are successfully making headway in their push for physician-assisted suicide.
Physician-assisted suicide is a very controversial topic in today’s society. Physician-assisted suicide is defined as an action performed by the physician at the request of the patient to end the patient’s life with certain medical procedures. The legalization of physician-assisted suicide should not be passed in the United States because it is not morally acceptable in the society, leads to misunderstanding of a physician’s duty and increases mental suffering of both patient’s family and doctor. Physician-assisted suicide should not be legalized since the action itself is not justified morally. It is never morally acceptable for the society to give up on its people’s lives.
Two court cases, Vacco v. Quill and Washington v. Gluksburg, brought about many controversies to the U.S. Supreme Court about Assisted Suicide. Directly from U.S Legal it says, “… The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that physician-assisted suicide is not a protected liberty interest under the Constitution. However… left the door open for states to permit physician-assisted suicide” (U.S Legal 2004). Although the U.S. Supreme Court believes assisted suicide to be a felony by the national government there isn’t a total ban in every state. The Supreme Court left this decision to be decided among each state individually whether to ban physician-assisted suicide or not.
Current Issues Surrounding Death A hot topic in today’s media and in discussion is the idea of physician assisted suicide and end of life care. There are several legal, ethical, social, and political issues surrounding this idea, which makes it a controversial topic. This paper will discuss some of these issues and explore the idea of physician assisted suicide and end of life care in more detail. Physician assisted suicide is defined as, “suicide by a patient facilitated by means or information (as a drug prescription or indication of the lethal dosage) provided by a physician who is aware of how the patient intends to use such means or information (Merriam-Webster, 2015).
The National Public Radio (NPR) once said and states, “Advocates of assisted-suicide laws believe that mentally competent people who are suffering and have no chance of long-term survival, should have the right to die if and when they choose. If people have the right to refuse life-saving treatments, they argue, they should also have the freedom to choose to end their own lives” (NPR Staff). As a patient’s pain grows increasingly worse, their only option is to adopt physician-assisted suicide. If there is no cure or chance of
Patients who decide to end their lives but lack the proper resources for physician-assisted suicide will take drastic measures to end their lives. As described in a YouTube video The New York Times uploaded, “Jack Kevorkian and the Right to Die” many patients still find ways to end their lives, often more dreadful and burdensome. The video described how many patients choose to starve themselves to accelerate their time of death or relocate to a state where physician-assisted suicide is allowed. Despite the illegalization of physician-assisted suicide, patients determined to end their lives continue to find methods to go through with their desires. By not allowing people to have the proper means to end their lives, they turn to more drastic and painful measures to force death upon themselves.
It is evident that people who are opposed to assisted suicide make some good claims. However, they are not focused on the big picture. Although the opposition does not say so directly, they apparently assume people should not have a choice on whether or not they die. To begin with,Smith (2008) observed there are two foundations to assisted suicide.