Compare Euthanasia And Physician Assisted Suicide

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.

What is physician-assisted suicide? “Suicide is the act of taking one's own life. In assisted suicide, the means to end a patient’s life is provided to the patient (i.e. medication or a weapon) with knowledge of the patient's intention” (American Nurses Association). Physician-assisted suicide is known by many names such as death with dignity, right to die, and of course, euthanasia. Euthanasia is a much more in-depth term concerning the patient and the type of suicide.

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 and voluntary euthanasia is still under scrutiny for a number of reasons. “In spring, 1996, the Ninth and Second Circuits were the first circuit courts in the country to find a constitutional prohibition against laws which make physician-assisted suicide a crime” (Martyn & Bourguignon, 1997). New York was one of the states that followed this prohibition. Eventually, The Ninth and Second Circuit, “allow physician-assisted suicide while attempting to protect individuals from unacceptable harms, such as involuntary euthanasia” (Martyn & Bourguignon, 1997). An assumption can be made, that euthanasia involves a licensed physician to play an active role in this partaking, and it’s where the patient prepares to die at.

Being able to decide the fate of your own life is not an easy decision to make, and is not something to be toyed with. However, when someone is in a desperate situation, and must choose before they lose their mind (quite literally), death may be more appealing, instead of living, and being forced to suffer. By legalizing euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide, we would provide “vulnerable” patients with better overall protection and health care, give patients (who are excruciatingly suffering and have no chance of recovery) the option to end their lives before they ever needed to go through such an ordeal and giving them peace of mind, and spare the families of the patients the emotional pain of watching their loved one slowly and painfully passing away. For these reasons, I believe that euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide should be legalized in Canada.

Physician assisted suicide / dying, is different from Euthanasia, the main difference on how the act is performed on ending the

Every individual has to make choices in life; life can be seen as a plethora of crossroads veering off into different directions with every which way. Choices that can create or destroy life; in the blink of an eye a life could end, but in the same moment a new life could be brought into existence. The choice of physician-assisted suicide provides control, familiarity, and closure to the terminally ill patients. The patient is able to choose where he or she will be, when the time is right, and the ability to be surrounded around loved-ones and gain closure by saying goodbye in a timely-manner.

A patient who has a terminal illness suffer tremendously every day. Since there is no cure for any terminal illness, doctors ease the patient's pain by prescribing them pain medication up to their final days. If it is acceptable for a beloved pet to be put euthanized, how is it any different for a terminally ill patient to end their life by physician-assisted suicide? Currently, terminally ill patients are fighting for their right to die. There is a hand full of states that have passed the law that allows terminally ill adult patients, who have six months to live, to end their lives by euthanasia or better known as physician-assisted suicide. Physician-assisted suicide is when a doctor performs a patient a lethal amount of substances into a patient, to end their life. The state of Virginia

There are many differences between PAS and euthanasia, let 's take a look at some of them. Physician assisted suicide means that the physician makes lethal means available to the patient, that can be used when the patient chooses. PAS is also defined as a patient who died by performing the last act of suicide. Euthanasia would mean the physician takes an active role in carrying out the patient 's request. For the patient to receive PAS, they would have to take the medication when they are still capable of swallowing or able to inject a lethal dosage of medication into his or herself. For the patient to receive euthanasia, the doctor would have to be the direct cause of the patient 's death. Because the patient must be competent of killing his or herself for PAS, one of the fears is that the patient will feel the need to take their life at an unnecessary time so they will still be able to before they become incapable. Euthanasia may give more time for the patient to be talked out of or accept other options for their terminal illness before their life is taken. There is more of a chance that a mistake will be made during PAS than there is for Euthanasia because the doctor will be there the whole time and assist the patient in death him or herself. Both will have the same outcome, they are just different options for the patient.

Before beginning, it is necessary that we clarify the difference between euthanasia and physician assisted suicide. Most use these terms inter-changeably when debating, although closely related, they are very different. Physician assisted suicide is when a medical professional prescribes a lethal dose of medication to a patient, usually one with a terminal illness, and then the patient has the ability to go home and proceed with taking the medication to

Albert Camus once quoted, “But in the end, one needs more courage to live than to kill them self.” Today I will be discussing the topic of Euthanasia also known as “assisted suicide.” The word originated from the Greeks, meaning “good death”. Euthanasia refers to the ending of one’s life, primarily to end suffering and pain. Euthanasia is a controversial topic and generates many political and religious debates. Although euthanasia is illegal in Canada, in some jurisdictions such as the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland and the American states of Washington, Oregon and Montana, euthanasia is a legal and common practice.

Over the years the medical field has developed many miraculous ideas and procedures. From organ transfers to blood transfusions, tons of lives have been saved. A doctor’s whole purpose is to help those dying to live. Yet, doctors have developed PAS, Physician Assisted Suicide, also known as Physician Assisted Death, and not to be mixed up with Euthanasia. Physician Assisted Suicide is morally wrong, gives doctors too much power, and it opens a door for those less critical patients to receive treatment too.

By definition, assisted suicide is when someone provides an individual with the information, guidance, and means to take his or her own life with the intention that they will be used for this purpose. When it is a doctor who helps another person to kill themselves it is called "physician assisted suicide." Euthanasia is the intentional killing by act or omission of a dependent human being for his or her alleged benefit. (The key word here is "intentional". If death is not intended, it is not an act of euthanasia) (Euthanasia.com, 2015)

Physician-Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia can be an unethical behavior, which is a behavior that is not of God. Unethical behavior is always an action that is not of God, which is outside of who He is as God of righteousness. Psalms 119:137 Consequently, right living is a result of righteousness in Christ. Accordingly, in a suitable way, no matter what we determine as a Christian in making decisions or choices, subsequently, it is who we are in Christ, in His divine wisdom, which comes from His righteousness when accomplishing in making decisions or choices.

There is no bioethical issue with a longer philosophical lineage than voluntary euthanasia, and physician assisted suicide. For most of that time, due to the mediation through religious authorities and law, the treatment of suicide has been largely negative. Older traditions of folklore and philosophy exhibit an attitude of abhorrence and arguments that show any form of suicide as being inherently wrong. Brian Stofell argues how this notion is wrong and how suicide can be morally right in some cases such as voluntary euthanasia and physician assisted suicide.