“First do no harm”, is the quote that is used over and over to support both sides of the debate over Euthanasia or Physician-Assisted Suicide. I dare to ask you one simple question, “How would you want you individual rights to live or no live to be determined?” Should an ancient oath written between 460 -380 B.C. determine your faith; or should your beliefs, wants and wishes rule your outcome? Do your life rally belong to you or can a judge, social society, medical team, legal team, and/or a jury of peers control more of your life than you. I say, “YES” physician-assisted suicide should be legal in all fifty states.
In 2003 a study found that 11 percent of physicians surveyed (1,902 total) would, under assured circumstances, be willing to accelerate a patient's death by prescribing medication, and that 7 percent would oversee a lethal injection, regardless of both acts being illegal at the time of the survey. This is proof that some doctors understand that the rights of
…show more content…
5, 2008, Washington became the second US state to legalize physician-assisted suicide after voters approved a ballot initiative (59% to 41%) to implement the Washington Death with Dignity Act. And in recent years physician-assisted suicide is legal in four US states: Oregon, Washington, Montana, and Vermont. And just two years earlier the US Supreme Court voted 6-3 to uphold the ability of physicians to prescribe lethal doses of controlled substances to terminally ill patients. People have rights as an individual to receive great complete care; and this care includes mind, body and soul. In some ancient cities, it was said that, magistrates kept a supply of poison for anyone who wished to die regardless of religious beliefs. Individual beliefs and concerns should mean more the society’s’ beliefs when it comes down to physician-assisted suicide; the individual is the one that have to live the life not me or you, so stop letting your beliefs and wishes control someone else’s
Introduction People have moral and ethical values that assist them in making decisions about their healthcare on a daily basis. What if a person found out that they had a terminal illness and only had months to live? What if those few months would be filled with treatments, pain and suffering, tear filled family members, and high cost medical bills? Physician- assisted suicide remains a debated topic which causes physicians, nurses and those involved to take a look at what they value and what they are willing to do in order to carry out a patient’s wishes.
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.
Though, in this paper, I have addressed several points that Dennis Plaisted has presented on why we should not legalize physician assisted suicide due to the issues with autonomy that convince the public that the state does not care enough to preserve the lives of those with less than six months to live. I argued that the limits of who and when an ill patient may be allowed to receive PAS are present for the state to relieve the pain of the ill who wish to have control over their death, and that it is only an alternative option for those patients. I considered a counterargument to my criticism, which argues that the state and doctors shouldn’t allow for PAS, as it gives the impression that the state does not care about the lives of the terminally ill. Just as well, the reputation of doctors as healers would be compromised if they supported this form of treatment. However, I explained that the quality of life is more valuable than forcing someone who is ill to suffer until their natural death.
“In the 20 years that Oregon’s Death with Dignity Law has been on the books, 1,749 patients have been prescribed lethal medications, and only 64% of them (1,127) used them to die, according to state data. Last year, Oregon doctors prescribed 206 lethal medications, 133 of which were reported used by patients” (Portland Press Herald). This statistic shows that not all patients who are prescribed the drugs, use them to end their life. Gale states, “The three most frequently cites reasons for requesting suicide were: a decreasing ability to participate in activities that made life enjoyable, loss of autonomy and loss of dignity.
First, Oregon was the front-runner in the world of physician-assisted suicide in the United States. In 1994, the state of Oregon passed the bill of a terminally ill individual’s right to die by lethal injection. Shortly after the passage of the bill, Oregon received their first challenge in the courts. In the case of Lee v. Oregon State, doctors and patients challenged Oregon, stating that the law violated the Constitution’s 1st and 14th amendments, as well as many other federal laws (Devlin, 1996). Due to this challenge in the courts, there was a temporary hold on the law.
Many believe it is in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, which states that, “no state shall deprive any person of life” (“14th Amendment”). However, the determining factor of life is not universally agreed upon, and one’s condition varies based on his or her ability to carry out daily tasks. Contrary to some common beliefs, the ban on physician-assisted suicide causes suffering for both the patient and for his or her family. Not only is it unfair to make the individual endure excruciating pain, but also no family member or friend should need to be a helpless bystander, watching a loved one slowly
Physician-Assisted Suicide: A Right to Murder? Doctors spend over eight years attending college, studying and practicing how humans work and how to save them. So why should it be right for physicians to help out their patients in killing themselves? If a person chooses to end their life, they completely loose the possibility of a medical miracle of being able to live through whatever condition they have.
In the last decade, a controversial topic in the medical field in America is about Physician-assisted suicide. Many citizens are questioning where the line stands in whether or not this goes against medical ethos, and if it is a right for terminally ill patients. While there are benefits and deficits to either side, I believe everyone should have the right to choose to participate in assisted suicide when battling a terminal illness. While a handful of states in America that include, Oregon, Washington, California, Colorado, Vermont, and with court decision, Montana have already passed the Death with Dignity Act, it is still not easily accessed and there are a lot of parameters regarding the Act ("Death with Dignity"). In Oregon you have to meet certain criteria.
The legalization of physician assisted suicide is a very polarizing topic with many advocates for each opposing position. Despite the position that physician assisted suicide should be illegal there are still many valid arguments for its legalization. One of the more popular arguments in favor physician assisted suicide is that it ends the suffering of patients who are experiencing intolerable pain. Most jurisdictions in which, have legalized physician assisted suicide to terminally ill patients, have done so on the belief that it presents a more “merciful death”. As physician assisted suicide does bring a more painless alternative most patients do not request the practice for the purposes of pain.
“Be smart, be strong, live honorably and with dignity, and just hold on” (Fray). Physician assisted suicide or better known as Death with Dignity isn’t your everyday topic or thought, but for the terminally ill it’s a constant want. The Death with Dignity isn’t something that all people or religions are in favor of and nor is the act passed in all states in the United States. Only three states in the U.S. today, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington offer their residents the option to have aid in dying as long as all the requirements are met. Death with Dignity doesn’t effect just the terminally ill person, but as well as family and friends around them creating many conflicting thoughts when opinion if Death with Dignity is truly moral and a choice
The first of many reasons that physician assisted suicide should be legalized across the whole nation is the fact that it is an option that is covered by many safeguards that ensure that the patients who receive the deadly prescription are those who are, in fact, terminally ill. One such example of these safeguards comes from the Oregon Death With Dignity Act which states: “Requests for [Death With Dignity Act] drugs must be confirmed by two witnesses and approved by two doctors. The patient must not be mentally ill. And most important of all, both doctors must agree that the patient has no more that six months to live.” (Drum).
During the late 1800’s, medication to reduce pain, like morphine and chloroform, became widely used by physicians. A man by the name of Samuel D. Williams, who was not a doctor, suggested that these pain relievers could also be used for the “quick and painless death” of a patient (Emanuel). While William’s thought was not acted on right away, it stayed with many people for quite some time. Some attempts were made in different states to legalize euthanasia or PAS but none of the bills were successful. Some organizations, like the National Society for the legalization of Euthanasia and the Hemlock Society, began to attempt to educate the population about euthanasia and PAS and why it should become a practice in the
After researching both sides of the argument, it is clear that the benefits of physician-assisted suicide outweigh the disadvantages. The benefits of ending a patient’s pain and suffering, minimizing the emotional and financial effects on families, and preserving the right for patients to decide their own fate, supports the legalization of physician-assisted suicide.
The Right to Die 1) Introduction a) Thesis statement: Physician assisted suicide offers patients a choice of getting out of their pain and misery, presents a way to help those who are already dead mentally because of how much a disease has taken over them, proves to be a great option in many states its legal in, and puts the family at ease knowing their love one is out of pain. i) The use of physician assisted death is used in many different countries and some states. ii) Many people who chose this option are fighting a terminal illness.
The Right to Die has been taking effect in many states and is rapidly spreading around the world. Patients who have life threatening conditions usually choose to die quickly with the help of their physicians. Many people question this right because of its inhumane authority. Euthanasia or assisted suicide are done by physicians to end the lives of their patients only in Oregon, Washington, Vermont, Montana, New Mexico and soon California that have the Right to Die so that patients don’t have to live with depression, cancer and immobility would rather die quick in peace.