Why Is Physician Assisted Suicide Wrong

Jacob Bresler

Mrs. Singleton

Honors English IV

4 May 2015

Physician Assisted Suicide: Right or Wrong? Physician Assisted Suicide, or PAS, is “suicide of a patient suffering from an incurable disease, effected by the taking of lethal drugs provided by a doctor” (Merriam-Webster). Most people cannot dictate whether PAS is an ethical, legal, or emotional issue. However, the fact cannot be denied that these suffering patients do not deserve to continue on suffering; they should be able to make their own decisions regarding their own lives. Deeming Physician Assisted Suicide illegal because of something such as the Hippocratic Oath is an inhumane response to the suffering of terminally ill patients as it only prolongs the pain endured by the patients

Thankfully, Physician Assisted Suicide is not an everyday situation. When it comes to thinking of PAS from a moral standpoint, it would be difficult to determine the morality before examining the facts. Terminal illnesses and diseases are essentially a death sentence for the afflicted patient. Along with these diseases come numerous, excruciating symptoms, most notable of them being pain. This pain can most accurately be described as “unbearable”. Statistically speaking, PAS is not that common, meaning there is not a likely chance that this practice could become overly common. In 2014, there were merely 368 confirmed cases of Physician Assisted Suicide in the United States, all of which were terminally ill patients. (CNN). So any argument stating that the numbers could get out of hand and the reasoning could be shoddy would be shot down by the fact that the numbers have remained constant for nearly twenty-seven years since the introduction of the practice (CNN). Ethically, the right thing to do would be to end the suffering as an act of mercy directed at the patient. However, the patient is still technically committing suicide, which in today’s society, is both illegal and considered wrong. Sadly, the only option besides PAS is to suffer and inevitably pass away; so, why prolong their suffering when their pain can be ended in a humane and painless way? This would be the most morally acceptable

The right to determine one’s own fate is encompassed by that Amendment as well. If a terminal patient is given a set amount of time to live, or more accurately to suffer, then the decision should be theirs to make. The doctors are the ones who make this merciful action possible. However, some may say that the doctor preforming this act is a direct violation of the Hippocratic Oath. This oath, which has an old, outdated version and a new, modernized version, describes the conduct(s) to be followed by doctors during the course of their practice. In the old, Greek version of the oath, it states “I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect” (PBS), which makes a pretty determinate stance against PAS. However, this version of the oath is set back in the near BC’s. The modern version of the oath states, “…Tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness…” (PBS). This states that, in certain situations, doctors may have to take the lives of others depending on the circumstances; the choice is still the doctor’s to make on the matter. The two oaths seem to