Pros And Cons Of Physician Assisted Suicide

Con/Amirikian

The idea that individuals should decide when to die, of course, is not entirely new. It has been going on for decades. Euthanasia, or mercy killing was practiced in ancient Greece and probably earlier. Passive euthanasia involves withholding or disconnecting life-sustaining equipment so that death can occur naturally. People who embrace the right to die concept believe that individuals should be able to control when and how their life should end. (Craig and Dunn 507) Many people think that it is better to die then to suffer, but that is not always the case. If the right to die is allowed then the elderly and the sick might ask to cut their life short just so they won’t be a burden to their love ones. Insurance companies might push for it to save money on treatments. There is a time when a person of whatever age is meant to die; it is better to let nature take its course. The right to die issue has sparked debate with opponents who arguing that, given the risk of mistakes or abuse, medically assisted death laws present more dangers than benefits. Assisted suicide automatically becomes the cheapest treatment option, and patients could be steered toward hastening their deaths. According to The Heritage Foundation Backgrounder “Always Care, Never Kill,” physician-assisted suicide is bad policy for four reasons:

Physician-assisted suicide endangers the weak and marginalized in society. Where it has been allowed, safeguards purporting to minimize this risk have proved to be inadequate and have often been watered down or eliminated over