Argumentative Essay : Physician Assisted Suicide Essay

Physician assisted suicide (PAS) has been debated for many years now. Is physician assisted suicide right or is it wrong? Many people have very different views about this issue. Some supporters feel that people should have the moral right to choose freely what they will do with their lives as long as they do not harm others. This right of free choice includes the right to end one's life when they choose. While you have some supporters who oppose any measures of permitting physician assisted suicide argue that physicians have a moral duty to preserve all life. To allow physicians to assist in destroying someone’s life violates the Hippocratic Oath to "do no harm." Opponents of physician-assisted suicide also believe that better pain management

The word suicide gives many people negative feelings and is a socially taboo subject. However, suicide might be beneficial to terminally ill patients. Physician- assisted suicide has been one of the most controversial modern topics. Many wonder if it is morally correct to put a terminally ill patient out of their misery. Physicians should be able to meet the requests of their terminally ill patients. Unfortunately, a physician can be doing more harm by keeping someone alive instead of letting them die peacefully. For example, an assisted suicide can bring comfort to patients. These patients are in excruciating pain and will eventually perish. The government should not be involved in such a personal decision. A physician- assisted suicide comes with many benefits for the patient. If a person is terminally ill and wants a physician assisted suicide, then they should receive one.

Physician assisted suicide is the termination of a life by the administration of lethal substances with the help of a doctor or physician. The legality and morality of physician assisted suicide is in a constant debate. Some claim that it is merciful to the terminally ill. Others claim that it is no better than murder. Despite its advocates, physician assisted suicide is morally and ethically wrong and impractical therefore it should remain illegal in the United States.

Assisted suicide is a topic that has ignited a severe debate due to the controversy that surrounds its implementation. Assisted suicide occurs when a patients expresses their intention to die and request a physician to assist them in the process. Some countries like Oregon, Canada, and Belgium have legalized the process terming it as an alternative to prolonged suffering for patients who are bound to die. Unlike euthanasia where a physician administers the process, assisted suicide requires that the patient voluntarily initiates and executes the process. Although there exists concession such a process is important to assist patients die without much suffering, there has emerged criticism on its risk of abuse and as an expression of medical

Suicide is one person’s personal decision; physician-assisted suicide is a patient who is not capable of carrying the task out themselves asking a physician for access to lethal medication. What people may fail to see however is that the physician is not the only healthcare personnel involved; it may include, but is not limited to, a physician, nurse, and pharmacist. This may conflict with the healthcare worker’s own morals and there are cases in which the patient suffers from depression, or the patient is not receiving proper palliative care. Allowing physician-assisted suicide causes the physician to become entangled in an ethical and moral discrepancy and has too many other issues surrounding it for it to be legal.

Is physician assisted suicide ethical? Physician assisted suicide is an up and coming ethical question that examines a person’s right to their own death. Many people support physician assisted suicide, citing that it can save a lot of pain and suffering. Others claim that the concept of physician assisted suicide is a slippery slope. A slippery slope in the sense that if society accepts euthanasia as a rightful death for the terminally ill, they will potentially accept it for other ailments as well.

Physician assisted suicide is murder. Using euthanasia, increased dosage of morphine or injecting patient’s with a lethal combination of drugs to slow his/her breathing until he/she dies is also murder. Physician assisted suicide is morally wrong. The classical theory for physician assisted suicide is utilitarianism because according to Mosser 2010, “utilitarianism is an ethical theory that determines the moral value of an act in terms of its results and if those results produce the greatest good for the greatest number.” Utilitarianism will solve the physician assisted suicide problem if all of the physicians will stand by the oath they say. According to the Hippocratic

Death is inevitable, but do we ride it out until the bitter end or chose a quick and painless death? Many people are against the idea of physician-assisted suicide and others aren’t such as Faye Girish writer of the article “Should Physician-Assisted Suicide Be Legalized?” Published in 1999 in Insight on the News, she argues that the legalization of Physician-Assisted Suicide will allow those who wish to die a peaceful way to do so. Faye establishes the building of her credibility with plausible facts and statistics, great emotional appeal, and personal sources. However, throughout the article several times she attempts to use pity to guilt people into agreeing with her argument, uses celebrities as sources, and doesn’t cite some of her sources questioning her credibility and finally, her argument.

There are many arguments in favor of Physician Assisted Suicide. Many illnesses like certain types of cancer, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease, and ALS may result in slow agonizing deaths. Many patients decide to use physician-assisted death because it relieves them from a tremendous amount of pain and suffering. A patient knowing that they’re going to die and that the pain is only going to get worse causes them to choose this decision. There’s no reason in letting a human suffer until they finally give out. “When death is the only way to relieve suffering, and inevitable regardless, why not allow it to come in the most humane and dignified way possible?” (Bender 21). Another pro is that health care costs are reduced. Medical care

The United States is a nation founded on freedoms and liberties, giving each citizen the ability to make their own life decisions. This freedom includes all aspects of one’s life, including medical care. With freedom comes responsibility, and this is true in terms of physician-assisted suicide. The ongoing struggle between those in favor and those opposed to this subject has ravaged the medical field, bringing into question what is morally and ethically right. The fact of the matter is that physician-assisted suicide is neither morally nor ethically acceptable under any circumstance. Not only is it a direct violation of a doctor’s Hippocratic Oath, but it is not constitutionally binding. Physician-assisted suicide would also lead to

There are many facts or opinions brought up against the physician-assisted suicide. One of the most impactful oppositions is that the law goes against the Hippocratic Oath that states first do no harm. In the oath, the quote “I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody if asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect.” The counter to that statement is that it is more harmful to do nothing for a terminally ill patient and force them to endure endless pain and suffering when their choice is to end their life (Pros & Cons, 2016). Another opinion against physician-assisted suicide is that by having it as an option it puts pressure on ill patients to take it, so that they are not a physical or financial burden to their families. Some religions see that the physician-assisted suicide is morally unethical. The Catholic Church views the law as morally wrong, killing of a human being, even by an act of omission to eliminate suffering, violates divine law, and offends the dignity of the human person (Death with Dignity.org, 2016). The pope has quoted “Freedom to kill is not a true freedom, but a tyranny that reduces the human being into slavery.” Another opposing viewpoint considers the chance for abuse or misuse by family for monetary gain. One of the hypothetical scenarios is that the family may influence or fool a dying patient into thinking that the suicide is the best for everyone so that they may collect on an inheritance or insurance policy

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.

Physician-assisted suicide has been a topic discussed since the beginning of modern medicine. Any topic that involves someone’s life and decisions that they may make about it usually becomes controversial. Physician-assisted suicide is an end of life option where people can voluntarily request medicine to end their life (Death With Dignity). There are many different opinions about the topic, and some people believe that it should be illegal because of the fact that it’s suicide. Also, many people’s religious or spiritual beliefs inhibit them from supporting this idea. Physician-Assisted Suicide should be legal because people should have control over their lives, there are many requirements to meet, and making it illegal has not stopped people from practicing it.

Physician-assisted suicide is the practice of providing a competent patient with a prescription for medication for the patient to use with the primary intention of ending his or her own life. Physician assisted suicide or PAS is different from euthanasia because with euthanasia, someone else’s causes death of the person. PAS the person his or her death. Physician-assisted suicide is the voluntary termination of one's own life by administration of a lethal substance with the direct or indirect assistance of a physician. According to the Death with Dignity National Center, in the 1900s, the first publicized assisted suicide was performed by Dr. Kevorkian in 1990 and again in 1998 when he showed the world a video of this act. He was convicted of murder in 1999. Also in 1990, the U.S Supreme court ruled in the Nancy Cruzan case that the “person has the right to refuse lifesaving medical services”, and her feeding tube was removed which ended her life shortly after. The patient self-determination act was passed which allowed patients to refuse or demand medical treatment.

Admittedly, many health care professionals are against assisted suicide due to different right to die laws in different areas. However, education can be provided by state government to educate their physicians on what the laws and policies on assisted suicide in their state include. Providers could be educated on the laws and policies of assisted suicide in their area as well what goes on in a procedure so they can get a better understanding of the certain choice of dying. In a study done in Canada where health care providers were interviewed on their responses to patients’ desire to control the dying process instead dying of natural death, it was found that “the nurses and physicians in this study did not prove to be particularly knowledgeable