Argumentative Essay On Dying

A physician must understand that when it comes to deciding to withhold or withdraw life sustaining treatment it is ultimately the patient’s decision unless the patient is not competent enough to make this choice. I believe that a person can lose their life at any point. Death is certain and no one can run from it. In my opinion, a patient’s autonomy is of utmost importance anytime during healthcare however the physician can name some recommendations of what would be the best option for the patient. When it comes to patients they deserve to be treated with respect and ultimately be treated as an end not as a means to an end.

In some states a terminally ill person is given the option whether or not they want a physician assisted suicide to end their life. In “A Death of One’s Own”, they follow the lives of three people who are terminally ill and are closing in on the end of their life. One of those being a man named Jim Witcher. Jim lives in Louisiana, where physician assisted suicide is frowned upon. Jim is slowly becoming unable to do things that he used to do, do to ALS. This puts a lot of stress on him and his wife Susie. Kitty Rayl was diagnosed with uterine cancer, she lives in Oregon and has the option to have physician assisted suicide if she pleases. Oregon is one of a few states where this is allowed. Ricky Tackett was suffering from liver failure. His wife, Rose and his doctors had to make the decision to take away his water and nutrients.

According to Ullmann-Margalit (51) while dealing with the subject the agony of doubt deliberates that it is among the most confusing issues to deal with. Most people do not want to die, at least not now, and the debate of holding on to the inevitable and that of letting go heats up. Questions arise concerning the social, religious and ethical factors that have to be taken into play while considering end-of-life or right-to-die and thus bringing complexity to an otherwise easy decision. But the most crucial question to ask is: are those in support of the right-to-die justified in their movement? This will be the question that will be addressed in this argumentative essay.

Brittany Maynard brought up a good argument when she said, “I would not tell anyone else that he or she should choose death with dignity. My question is: Who has the right to tell me that I don’t deserve this choice?” (Slotnik). Brittany Maynard was a young woman who found out she had a terminal brain cancer and ended up becoming the public face for the right to die act. Many people believe that this act should not be in place, but in taking this act away people lose their right to choose when they want to die. People may argue the fact that doctors have access the drug with assisted suicide is very unsettling; however, the doctors are professionals who are trusted with this drug. This act is important because it gives the terminally ill one last independent decision before they lose themselves. Taking away the act means taking their free will away from them.

Brittany Maynard, a young woman who shocked the world by announce her assisted death. This is the case many years ago and reported by all media that reopened the debate in the United States on assisted death. This issue is very controversial by religious people who oppose and preach that only God has the power to decide on the life and death of the human being, however, in modern and present life, there are states that support people who determine under much evidence to end their life if there are no other alternatives to continue living.

At today’s visit, she is awake, alert, oriented. She was evaluate by hospice and was appropriate for admission but she refused admission and states that she wanted to continue with palliative care for the next 2 weeks. I am here to follow up for her disabling dyspnea. She is noticeable dyspneic on my arrival. She states that she continues to have chronic dyspnea/shortness of breath and that she does not want oxygen but is willing to try medication. She complains of a new onset cough, intermittent, clear secretion. She does not feel it is associated to her Lisinopril. She complains of GERD. She states that she would like to try morphine for her shortness of breath and if it is not effective then she will elect hospice

1.)     Explain how the answers to the self-inventories in the text concerning facts, attitudes, beliefs and feelings about death reflect our societal understanding or lack of understanding of death. I think that the self- inventory question reflected on both our understanding and lack of understanding about death related topics. Some of the answers to the questions on the inventory I knew without look at the answers, but some of the answers actually surprised me. The question about the death certificate was one of the questions that actually surprised me. I assumed before I did the inventory that every death certificate had a specific cause of death that was given on the certificate. Another answer that

Dying is never lovely. Mary Roach, defines in her essay, “Don’t Jump”, the mania from the sensation of her dropping from a precipice. The fall would have resulted in certain death if not for the attached cable halting her torso, SPLAT! Suggesting in the essay, “That jumping-off San Francisco’s Golden Gate Bridge would be a lovely way to go” (Roach, 2001). There are people that are desperate in life and choose this picturesque setting; the beauty of protruding boulders stippled within the grass covered hills; the silhouette of San Francisco pasted against the horizon or the white capped waves of the blue Pacific. If the scenery does not enthrall the senses, the pacifying rhythm of the bay thrashing the shore and the tower pylons has a narcotic effect. Magnificent in many facets, yet there are individuals who travel there to terminate their misery. Possibly selecting this landmark to make their last declaration on Earth and be remembered for the prominence of the location. Ms. Roach discusses how fencing could hinder some from jumping. The scenic bridge does not inspire people to choose death over life; however, the Bridge Authority repudiates tarnishing the vista by implementing a method to reduce the casualties.

On Sunday at my place of worship, I began to chat with a friend in order to find out about the topic of like after death. I was interested in knowing if she knew what would happen after we die and how she know that and how she believes or not believe she will be prepared to handle that. Questions asked included: In order to uncover this mystery I began to ask her questions like, what do you belief happens to us after we die? And how do you know that whatever happens to us actually happens if we have no one to ask to whom it has occurred to? How do you prepare for that which happens after death? Is it important to prepare now or does it not matter how we live now? Is life after death important to you? Is there really something as life after death? Or is it death after we have lived? why do you believe in this? What proof is there of this occurring or more so not occurring after death? If there is life after death why are you afraid to die, why not be happy to die in order to start a new one? If there is life after death, do we remember what happened in our previous life? And does life actually ever ends for us?

Like another members of the board of the Golden Gate Bridge argued. The government has no business interfering with the free will of persons who whish to commit suicide, and if the Golden Gate Bridge is made suicide proof, persons who wish to commit suicide will easily find some other site, such as the nearby Bay Bridge. Also, by altering the appearance of the Golden Gate Bridge one of the main attractions of the San Francisco, by making it suicide proof, it will ruin the image of the Bridge; the tourism of the San Francisco city, would decrease. Therefore, the economy and mainly the local businesses of the city will suffer. Even thought, the government has no business interfering in people’s wishes to end their life, but if by making the Golden

If you bring up the subject of suicide in a room of people, it is likely that the individuals will become quite, begin to become uncomfortable. Why is this? Is it because of the aspect of death? Is it the ways it is done? Society may say it is a wrong and selfish act, or that a person is not considering others and therefore it is erroneous. We live in a society where mental health problems are rampant, societal issues take over our daily lives and out everyday stresses impact our health, yet our understanding of the subject that is to be avoided and carries a stigma with it that affects the way people see those who have attempted or completed suicide. When deciding if suicide is an ethical or morally accepted action, we must take many factors into consideration. Some of these factors may include the culture and society in which we live and our knowledge of psychological and biological causes. With these factors in mind, we can then adopt our own personal philosophies on whether suicide is an ethical or moral act. While not all individuals are going to agree on a consensus, it is important to consider others opinions and be aware of them while discussing the subject, even if it is uncomfortable.

The question of life and death is one that many people will ponder when the time comes. When the matters are there to face the decision becomes one that everyone fears to face. To any person, the law of assisted suicide is the matter of free will.

    America’s founding fathers declared that every person had certain inalienable rights they are born with and cannot be separated from. They listed citizens’ rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Today's government must decide if a right to life equates to a right to death.

Most adults diagnosed with cancer undergo years of treatment in attempts to cure that cancer. However, sometimes these treatments may not work, or the cancer is found too late in a patient to be stopped, and a patient’s cancer can be determined terminal, which means that the cancer can not be cured and will lead to death. If cancer is determined terminal, end-of-life care can be administered patients to control lasting pains, including shortness of breath, nausea, and constipation. However, this treatment does not cure the cancer, and will not prevent death in a terminally ill cancer patient. In some cases, patients decide that receiving end-of-life treatment is not worth it if the treatment does not prevent death. Terminally ill cancer patients may also continue to experience unbearable suffering, despite end-of-life treatments, as it is not always effective. These factors may push some terminally ill cancer patients to request to be actively euthanized. Active euthanasia is the merciful ending of a patient’s life through a single act, such as an injection. Terminally ill cancer patients should have the right to determine if they are actively euthanized. However, only patients who consider their suffering unbearable should have the right to be euthanized.

Voluntary euthanasia, or physician-assisted suicide, has been a controversial issue for many years. It usually involves ending a patient’s life early to relieve their illness. Most of the controversy stemmed from personal values like ethics or religion. The euthanasia debate puts a huge emphasis on what doctors should do for their patients and how much a person’s life is worth. Supporters of euthanasia primarily focus on cost and pain alleviation. Opponents of euthanasia tend to focus on morality. Whether euthanasia is legal or not could significantly affect future generations’ attitudes about death. Euthanasia should be legalized nationally because it helps patients that could be in unimaginable pain, offers more options for more people, and it is relatively inexpensive compared to the alternatives.