Assisted Suicide

sit in pain due to their sicknesses. Should these people have to go through all

One of the most controversial end-of-life decisions is “physician-assisted suicide” (PAS). This method of suicide involves a physician providing a patient, at his or her own request, with a lethal dose of medication, which the patient self-administers. The ethical acceptability and the desirability of legalization of this practice both continue to cause controversy (Raus, Sterckx, Mortier 1). Vaco v. Quill and Washington v. Glucksberg were landmark decisions on the issue of physician-assisted suicide and a supposed Constitutional right to commit suicide with another's assistance. In Washingotn v. Glucksberg, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the state of Washington's ban on physician-assisted suicide was not unconstitutional.

Imagine a cancer patient on a short rode to death. The pain this patient is experiencing is unreal and unimaginable to most. The pain medicine that can be used does little to take the agony away. The doctors can put the patient in an induced coma, but what kind of living is that? It is not living. The patient does not want to go on. Is it so wrong to ask for a way out? With less than six months to live, the patient’s hope is gone. Many argue that euthanasia is not ethical, but is it really ethical to let someone live in constant, horrifying pain and agony? While in some cases having the right to die might result in patients giving up on life, physician-assisted suicide should be legalized in all fifty states for terminally ill patients with worsening or unbearable pain.

The thoughts of assisted suicide are very mixed. Some people believe that it is a great way to put terminally-ill patients out of the their pain and suffering. They see it as a way for a person to die with dignity after suffering from a painful disease. Others think it is beyond morally wrong for a doctor to intentionally end a patient’s life. They feel that a doctor should not have unnecessary deaths riding, on their shoulders the rest of their career. Assisted suicide goes way beyond the beliefs of medicine and is morally wrong in so many ways.

Imagine suffering day to day with consistent hospital visits, numerous medications, and unbearable pain for the next six months of your life, then being told that dying peacefully is not a granted privilege. Then imagine not being able to die in a controlled and dignified process like you prefer to. How would that affect the way you feel about death and the rest of your life you have left? Millions of people suffering from terminal illnesses consider physician-assisted suicide, but their wishes are rejected due to state and government beliefs. In fact, only five states out of fifty have a law permitting citizens the right to participate in physician-assisted suicide. That leaves just only 10% of the United States entitling critically ill patients to die with nobility. However, many citizens are commencing to lean toward physician-assisted suicides once they ascertain they hold a terminal illness.

When talking about doctors, death and incurable diseases, one of the most controversial topic that comes up is Physician assisted suicide. Webster’s dictionary define it as, “suicide by a patient facilitated by means or information (as a drug prescription or indication of the lethal dosage) provided by a physician who is aware of how the patient intends to use such means or information.” Most of us have experienced the pain of seeing our loved ones dying in a hospital since doctors and modern medicine can only help us so much. Physician assisted suicide not only helps alleviates the never ending pain, but patient also dies with dignity. On the other hand, people who oppose it, have strong religious and ethical beliefs. They think that Physician assisted suicide demeans the human value and violates doctor’s Hippocratic Oath. After researching a lot about this topic, I decided that taking a moderate stance would be the best option because even though I agree that PAS (Physician assisted suicide) goes against medical ethics and religious beliefs I also believe that sometimes PAS is the best option available for people who are fatally sick and want to die with dignity and peace. In this paper I will discuss the history of physician assisted suicide, why is it important to have this option available and how should we limit PAS to make a compromise with people who are against it.

Patient assisted suicide, death with dignity, euthanasia or patient assisted death; whichever one that is used, they all mean the same tragic thing. The life of another human being is more than what comes to eye. For years now, everyone has been arguing whether physicians have the right to assist with patient assisted death. The man who started this epidemic was known as Dr. Jack Kevorkian. Kevorkian was a pathologist who assisted the acute and critically ill with ending his or her life. After Kevorkian spent years battling the legality of his actions with the courts, he ended up spending eight years in prison. Today, there are only 7 locations that allow physicians to do this: Oregon, Washington, Vermont, California, Montana, Colorado, and Washington DC. At the start of this whole situation, doctors would attempt to use very high dosages of analgesic, pain relieving medication, to end a patients life; however, that ended very quickly. Shortly after that time, doctors would use the same drugs administered for lethal injections. Typically a three step process: the first shot induces unconsciousness, the second shot causes muscle paralysis and respiratory arrest, and the final shot causes cardiac arrest, which ceases heart contractions. Currently, doctors use a drug called

In the medical field there are massive amounts of treatments for various diseases. Some treatments are going to help the patient feel more comfortable; however, some are going to counteract the problem, and others are going to help kill the patient. Physician assisted suicide is defined by medterms.com as “the voluntary termination of one 's own life by administration of a lethal substance with the direct or indirect assistance of a physician.” Any person wishing to undergo assisted suicide in Oregon must be at least 18 years of age and have a terminal illness. This illness must be within its final stages and leave the patient with less than six months to live.

Since 1994, Physician-Assisted Suicide (PAS) has been legal in the state of Oregon. The law allows patients diagnosed as having less than six months to live to decide when they will die. Sadly, death is a fact of life. Losing a loved one to debilitating disease or terminal illness is an experience to which an increasing number of Americans can relate. Every day new cases of cancer, ALS, and other painful, potentially fatal diseases are diagnosed in the US. The American Cancer Society estimates that over 22,000 new cancer cases will be reported in 2015 in Oregon alone, with roughly 8,000 subsequently dying. Faced with such overwhelming diagnoses, many patients choose to fight; other patients opt to spend their remaining time with their families,

I believe physician-assisted death is morally permissible if one relied on the philosophical methodology of utilitarianism. Physician-assisted death can be defined as a patient administered form of death prescribed by a physician. Not to be confused with euthanasia, the intentional killing by act or omission of a dependent patient for their alleged benefit. Physician-assisted suicide comes with a multitude of legal safeguards to protect certain communities, either physician or patient, who might abuse the practice. In order for a patient to qualify they must fulfill the following: The patient must be at least 18 years of age, must be a resident of the state legalized to practice physician-assisted death, two physicians must evaluate the patient

It is those ideas that get in mind, what life will be with that illness or disease having on your shoulder not knowing what to do. How to get away from that nightmare that has change not only physically, but mentally as well. Finding another way to stop this and not having to think the worst will happen. As to come with this most people with a terminal disease comes with a solution to end this without having to suffer with the pain that is taking away lives. One of the final solutions most do is the help of a doctor to take away the life of the patient known as physician assisted suicide. Unfortunately, people find this as a way to get away from the illness they have and giving up so the ill won’t have to suffer anymore. Even worse this not

Imagine yourself lying in bed at the hospital hooked up to all sorts of machines that are just barely keeping you alive. Imagine the pain and suffering you are in on a daily bass and the medication being given to you isn’t cutting it any longer and all the doctors and nurses can do for you is just keep you comfortable. The doctors have literally given you no chance of survival and death is imminent. You have taken the time you have left to say your good-byes, came to terms with dying, and you are ready to leave this world. If you could choose to end your life instead of wasting away, would you take advantage of it?

Assisted suicide is a form of suicide where someone helps dying patients suffering from health problems die by taking medicine prescribed by their doctor to help them die in peace without suffering. In October 2015, California Governor Jerry Brown signed a bill to make assisted suicide legal in his state after the death of a California woman named Brittany Maynard (McGreevy, 2015). The Catholic Church was fighting Jerry Brown because they did not want the bill to pass since suicide is against religious teachings (McGreevy, 2015). The California Governor made the decision to sign the bill based on a person’s right to decide when and how to die (McGreevy, 2015). California joined Oregon, Washington and Vermont in making this legal. Other states such as New York, New Jersey, Tennessee, Connecticut, the District of Columbia and Maryland are trying to pass legislation to make assisted suicide legal (McGreevy, 2015).

Freedom, independence and self-autonomy are fundamental rights of a human, This directly pertains to the central notion of an individual's right to live and right to die. A terminally ill patient should not suffer through excruciating pain and discomfort but rather embrace a timely and dignified death, this is implicit in the concept of liberty and self-determination. Despite rapid advancement in medical technology and modern palliative care, some patients suffer from incurable terminal diseases which inflicts destructive pain upon the patient both physically and mentally. They are unable to seek the compassionate relief of pain and suffering that they wish to

Today we are face with death in a different setting then our ancestors, instead of dying at a younger age and dying in our home with our families, people are now dying at a hospital or in a medical setting. We are living longer because of the advances in medicine, this is causing us to develop diseases that our ancestors never had to face. Our ancestors did not live long enough to develop some of the diseases we face today. As Jones (2011) provides, “we don’t just die of different diseases then our ancestors, we also die in different circumstances” (p. 302). The changes in circumstances have caused us to reevaluate what is believed to be ethical when faced with dying. There are many medical options a terminal ill or elderly patient that is dying can choose from, however there is great debate whether some of these options are ethical.