Dennis Plaisted Suicide

In this paper, I will explain Dennis Plaisted’s argument that physician assisted suicide should not be legalized on the basis of autonomy in the case that the state does not value the lives of the terminally ill if they allow the legislation to be enacted. I argue that his argument is unsound because the government does care about its people and wants to allow the terminally ill to have an alternative to suffering. First, I will explain the basis of physician assisted suicide and summarize a few of Plaisted’s arguments against it. Then, I will argue that his claim is unsound since the state is sympathetic enough to allow an alternative treatment to incurable illnesses, and that Plaisted’s theory fails in that for the legislation to work, they

They may believe that neither the state nor willing physicians should condone the desire for someone to take their own life unnaturally in the first place. Plaisted explains such ideas in his article, such as that society may fear the state caring less about your life if they allow you to go through with killing yourself with the help of a physician. Though they may be terminal, a person with less than six months to live is not dead yet (Plaisted 210). The life of a terminally ill patient may not be ideal, but it should be in the interest of the state to preserve the lives of its people. They may suggest for state to put its focus into funding research for new medicines, towards better hospice care, and for more resources to make the patient as comfortable as possible until their natural death. By allowing the option of physician assisted suicide, the state may be softening the idea that there is no hope for someone that ill, and that sends the wrong message to the public. Just as well, the Death With Dignity legislation may compromise the view that people have on doctors as healers (Plaisted 205). Patients may lose trust in them if they condoned, or even participated in physician assisted suicide. Those who are against PAS feel that there should not be a loss of hope for someone suffering from an incurable disease, and are against my argument

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. Therefore, I criticize Plaisted’s argument and believe that physician assisted suicide should be a legal