The Oregon Death with Dignity Act was passed on October 27, 1997. The Death with Dignity Act allows terminally-ill Oregon citizens to end their lives through voluntary lethal medications prescribed by a physician for that specific purpose. Philosophers Rachel's, Steinbock and Foot have different opinions, Rachel’s is for the Dignity act Steinbock and Foot are against the act. Each Philosopher has good points on why they agree or disagree with the Death with Dignity Act, however after reading all their views, if a similar case was up to vote for I would vote for the initiative. One argument that stood out to me that Rachel had that made me decide that I would vote for a initiative was talking about a cancer patient in their last stage of cancer and suffering is very sad and they are just suffering. This quote also persuaded me to say that I would vote for something like the Death with Dignity Act, because we people are dying and suffering they are not themselves, also if they are in hospice they are just going to keep them on so much medicine so they are not suffering, “Part of my point is that the process of being "allowed to die" can be relatively slow and painful,whereas being given a lethal injection is relatively quick and painless” …show more content…
Patients should have the right to choose what their last months of life will be like they can either be miserable and constantly be doped up on medicine or if the choose to do the Death with Dignity act and the physician ok’s it then that should be their right to choose. If a stage 4 cancer patient is about to lose the battle with cancer and decides to just get out of misery than why should that be someone else’s opinion beside the cancer patient that is going to end up passing anyways. We as humans usually give our opinion even when not wanted but, sometimes we need to take into consideration how someone else feels and they also have an