Argumentative Essay On Assisted Suicide

However, there is immense criticism on the morality of the process, especially because the process denies a patient the right to natural death. The critics of the assisted suicide procedure argue that such a process devalues human life and tends to promote suicide as an alternative to personal suffering. By claiming that the procedure allows terminally ill patients to initiate dignity at death is flawed because the purpose of medical profession is to ensure a dignified life. According to the physicians’ code of ethics and the Hippocratic Oath, physicians are not allowed to do harm to their patients because their role is to allow a dignified health for members of the community. Consequently, legalization of Physician Assisted suicide that requires physicians to assist the patients to die is against their medical ethics. Quill, Cassel, & Meier (2010) provide that although the patients voluntarily ask the medical practitioners to assist in the process, the practitioners have a role to advise the patients against such a procedure. Besides, such a premise is bound to raise awareness of suicide as an alternative to suffering within the public domain, which may encourage such behavior among healthy members of the community that feel that they enjoy the freedom to make such a decision. On this basis, the negative moral implication of assisted suicide makes its legalization unworthy in the

Currently, six states have enacted the death-with-dignity law allowing a terminally ill patient the right to choose how their life ends after obtaining permission from those in authority. In 44 states, state law prohibits assisted suicide and an active participant considered as committing a criminal offence. The U.S. Supreme Court protects a patient’s liberty to refuse medical treatment, but continues to side with the government’s interest in preserving life outweighing a person’s right to assisted-suicide. According to the U.S. Code, “Assisted suicide, euthanasia, and mercy killing have been criminal offenses throughout the United States and, under current law, it would be unlawful to provide services in support of such illegal activities.” (U.S. Code)

Brittany Maynard, a woman known for her advocacy in the controversial topic of assisted suicide, officially ended her life this fall after learning of her fatal brain tumor. After complaining of horrible headaches, she decided to see a doctor where they gave her this traumatic news. She had two corrective surgeries to try and stop the growth of her large tumor, but they were unsuccessful. Her doctor then suggested full brain radiation, but after months of researching this option, along with many other, she knew her quality of what short life she had left would quickly deteriorate. With the help of her family, friends, and newly-wed husband, she made the decision to move with her loved ones from her California home to Oregon, where death with

Many people in the world are suffering from illness that cannot be cured. They live their last days in pain and suffering wondering when and why it happened to them. Instead of suffering, many people dream of suicide to take their pain away but they know no one would understand. In very few states, it is legal for people to get assistance to put them out of their pain and suffering. It is called assisted suicide. Assisted suicide is the help from a physician to end their patients’ lives with their permission. The patient must have a terminal illness with less than six months to live to qualify. Many people are against assisted suicide because they believe that it is just a cover for murder. People should be thought of as dying with dignity

In the ever changing role and dynamic atmosphere that healthcare provides, unique challenges and opportunities constantly arise which are a multi-faceted labyrinth of ethical and moral dilemma. One of the most contested and widely debated topics to be found in the healthcare workplace today is the subject of Assisted Suicide. Altering a person’s course of death into a process driven role, rather than the client’s final life event, creates a myriad of ethical and moral dilemmas.

Physician assisted suicide does not lead to abuses or down the hypothetical slope. Peter Rogatz, a physician, states that requesting someone to be taken off a ventilator is socially acceptable. What is the difference between assisted suicide and ending a ventilator? Does one have to be in coma or brain dead to allow him to die with dignity? These are the questions that patients and society are asking today. Rogatz asks these questions from a physician’s point of view and explains the pain that he has seen through suffering patient’s eyes. These questions alone are one factor that Rogatz is sickened by because he does not understand what in the world the difference should be between these two tragic events. The next point Rogatz explains is that people should see assisted suicide as a merciful end rather than killing. The word killing has such a strong meaning and that does not have any place in the right to die debate because killing is intentional without consent (134). Rogatz believes that the physicians who understand the plea for assisted suicide are doing good not harm. More often than not, the physicians responding to assisted suicide will handle the situation correctly. Rogatz does accept that there will be someone who will abuse this power, but that will not happen with everything physicians have as guidelines. According to Rogatz, physicians also have a strict criterion to even think about mentioning assisted suicide. The patients must qualify for assisted suicide. This factor alone also helps to eliminate abuses because physicians only can administer to a select number of terminally ill patients (134). Assisted suicide is not an act of murder and does not lead down a hypothetical slope.

"You have stage IV lung cancer that has metastasized to your lymph nodes and bones. Your prognosis is poor; you may have another 18 months left [to live]." The oncologist’s words marked the beginning of my ex-husband’s physical and emotional suffering until his untimely death in January 2017. Witnessing his unrelenting pain and watching him suffer from lung cancer and the horrible side effects of chemotherapy, I wondered why the doctors did not offer him any other alternatives other than living in progressive pain. Why would they let him suffer for the next 18 months with ineffective pain management treatment when his prognosis was so poor? This option should have been available to him, but due to state laws and

In 1994, Oregon became the first state to pass a bill legalizing physician aid-in-dying (Richardson, 2011). This law would allow a terminally ill patient with 6 months or less to live to end their life by their own terms (“It’s Not Assisted Suicide”, 2011). This bill leads to the question “Why would a form of purposeful death be legalized?” The bill, itself was passed for many reasons including the fact that the patients want to have control over their life and ultimately their death (“It’s Not Assisted Suicide”, 2011). They also do not want to live in fear of what will eventually happen to them. “Death with Dignity” was passed is because many terminally-ill patients do not want to live in excruciating pain and in fear of what will happen to them, living a prolonged life or taking control over one’s death is a personal choice belonging only to the individual making it.

On New Year’s day in 2014, 29-year-old newly wed and hopeful mother , Brittany Maynard, was diagnosed with a malignant stage four brain tumor and was given six months to live. After two failed surgeries and full brain radiation, Maynard made the decision to die on her own terms. She and her family moved to Oregon and established residency so that she could utilize Oregon’s Death With Dignity Act. Maynard chose to end her life on November 1, 2014. Before her death, Maynard asked her friends and family: “Who has the right to tell me that I don't deserve this choice? That I deserve to suffer for weeks or months in tremendous amounts of physical and emotional pain? Why should anyone have the right to make that choice for me?” This same question

Physician assisted suicide, or the so-called right-to-die, is a highly controversial issue that has appeared before many state and federal legislators but, has failed to pass in many states due to the huge opposition from groups such as the Catholic Church and disabled-rights organizations. However, physician assisted suicide is when a life ending medication is prescribed by a doctor for the patient, most commonly with a terminal illness, to take on their own. This medication merely accelerates the rate at which the person dies; therefore, it can not be considered suicide because they are only accelerating the rate at which the patient dies (Drum 29-31). In order for a patient to qualify

deaths every day. Within these 153,000 deaths, about 90% of them are terminally ill patients

On the morning of April 20th, 2017, nearly a year ago as of the writing of this paper, Charlie and Francie Emerick held hands for one last time. After months of preparation, both physically and mentally, the couple was ready. They were about to commit assisted suicide (Aleccia). While many argue against the ideals of assisted suicide, which is the act of, with the help of a physician, ending your life, I believe that, under the proper legislation, it is an acceptable form of death. While some people may argue that death should be natural, doctors won’t do it, and that it’s a cry for help, it’s obvious that this is a considerable alternative which is a genuine option to the end of life.

Laura is arguing that patient assisted suicide (PAS) should be legal for every individual to use as an end of life decision when they have a terminal disease. She argues that PAS is a way for a terminally ill patient to pass away on their own terms with dignity and control.

Physician assisted suicide is requested by the terminally ill, typically when the pain from the illness is too much to handle and is not manageable through treatments or other medications. Assisted suicide is more of a broad term for helping someone die a good death, physician assisted suicide is where a medical doctor provides information and medication and the patient then administers the medications themselves. Euthanasia is also another term that is commonly heard, this refers to a medical doctor that voluntarily administers the lethal dose of medication to the patient when the patient requests it, due to not physically being able to do it themselves (Humphry, 2006). There pros and cons with this topic throughout the world, but is one of the biggest debated things here in the United States of America and to this day there are only five states that have legalized physician-assisted suicide (ProCon.org, 2015). The government should allow patients that are terminally ill the right to choose physician assisted suicide, why should they have to suffer when there is a way out.

“Dogs do not have many advantages over people, but one of them is extremely important: euthanasia is not forbidden by law in their case; animals have the right to a merciful death.”