When the term “assisted suicide” is applied, there are some who feel as though it should be against the law to take such extreme actions. But no matter if the term “aid in dying” and “dying with dignity” is used instead, support increases dramatically. But no matter what we call the practice, the idea is still the same. There is a small percentage of people who have an outlook of imminent suffering and sadly, death. Shouldn’t those who are terminally ill have the option and or right to end their lifetime on their terms and in their style? Some feel as if the terminally ill patients would have eventually died from their illnesses and that their physician did not make a choice to heal them. But instead, they hand the decision over to the patient …show more content…
Patients should have the right to choose if they are completely coherent and of sound judgment. Doctors should be permitted to administer life-ending drugs without legal retribution or other consequences currently enforced. The utilitarian moral theory states that we should reduce a person suffering and increase their happiness, that given a choice between two acts, the one that creates greater happiness for the greatest number of individuals should be the one chosen. Therefore, it is the responsibility of physicians to relieve their patients of their pain and suffering by doing what would bring the most happiness to the patient according to utilitarianism. (Mills, J. 2008). Those who are supporters of legalization are responding to the reverence of being in perpetual torture and excruciating pain and in awe of being hooked up to life-support equipment, and of becoming a burden financially or an emotional drain on their households. They fear becoming dependent on others or receiving an inferior quality of life. Often just having a means to suicide limits anxiety and allows the patient to enjoy life more fully. And making physician-assisted suicide legal could very well make it easier to regulate and