Arguments Against Physician Assisted Suicide

People should be able to to live their life to the longest. Physician-assisted suicide is a controversial topic spreading throughout the United States due to the ethical issues surrounding the topic. Physician-assisted suicide is legal in a few states and other states have passed bills to make sure this does not happen. Even though some say that all have a right to die, physician-assisted suicide should not be legal because it would be too psychologically damaging to all involved.

Having a right to die is what makes assisted suicide so controversial. According to Karaim in 2013 “Decisions about sustaining life, allowing it to end or even hastening death are among the most difficult choices terminally ill patients and their families can face”

Although some patients want to live, they may be forced to take a cheaper option. “Assisted dying could help control health care spending, but he worries about its misuse. ‘There's a good chance of inequality in assisted dying,’ he says, ‘with it being offered most readily to those least able to pay for regular medical care or long term care.” (Worsnop 1992 para 17). People will end up losing their lives over this. With many people fueled by greed, they might take this consideration quickly because they would want the extra dollars in the hands of loved ones. Doctors According to Jost in 2003 “Medical and insurance lobbies cite the low success rate of malpractice plaintiffs as proof that most of the suits are — as President Bush described them — ‘frivolous.’ But they say the financial and emotional burdens of defending malpractice suits — or trying to guard against them — are too much for many doctors” (para. 19). Some doctors do malpractice, so there is a chance that they would put a person under so they could save money. Even healthcare companies would use this reason as an exploit for patients so they could save

Anyone could make hasty decisions that could actually mean life or death. “The question was how to determine her views on the basis of a few comments she made when she was in her 20s and had no reason to expect the fate that befell her” (Jost 2005 para 15). People might not actually know what they want to happen to them in a situation until they are put into that exact situation. Their past words will be interpreted in a way that will give the patient what they would not want to happen to them. The system the people have in place also does not do a exuberant job at keeping the choice to the one person involved. According to Jost in 2005 “The system currently in place has worked well and continues to work well in ensuring that the rights of those to have or not have medical treatment consistent with their personal values and choices are respected” (para. 2). While in a state where the patient cannot communicate to others, doctors typically go to those close to the patient to help make the patient’s fate. While this may look like the doctor trying to do his best to comply with a patient, those who way seem close to the patient and have a wrong decision. So what other options could there be beside assisted