Terminally-ill patients and their families are forced to make some of the toughest decisions anyone will ever have to consider. When it comes to end-of-life decisions, there are two main options that will help prevent unnecessary suffering. The use of a widely-accepted practice, a “do not resuscitate" order, which is a legal order to withhold life-saving interventions in the event of cardiopulmonary arrest. And an alternative option, which has been highly controversial and heavily debated over the past twenty years, is the “physician-assisted suicide” or “aid-in-dying” as it is referred to by supporters. As of 2015, California is the fifth US state to allow physician-assisted suicide after Vermont, Washington, Oregon, and Montana. These states have …show more content…
Supporters of assisted suicide say it allows terminally ill patients to avoid unnecessary suffering, have control over an otherwise immutable situation, and pass away on their own terms. But opponents say assisted suicide devalues human life, legitimizes a form of suicide and is susceptible to abuse.
Advocates of physician-assisted suicide back their cause with the American ideals of life and liberty. Barbara Coombs Lee, president of Compassion & Choices, explains how the organization is an advocate for terminally-ill patients having the highest quality of life possible through hospice, palliative care, and physician-assisted suicide. “We don't promote just one choice (in end-of-life decisions). We think people deserve an entire spectrum of choices,” says Coombs, who goes on to explain, “But people who are mentally alert and who are making a rational decision to choose — not life or death, because that decision has already been made — but when and how they will