Doctor Assisted Death And Its Effects On Children And Mentally Ill Patients

It is said that helping somebody who wants to die in a peaceful, painless way should be legal. Choosing how we die is a basic human freedom and if an individual's quality of life is deteriorating, due to a terminal disease such as cancer, they should have the right to stop their suffering via physician assisted suicide. It might be the case that the drugs for assisted suicide are far less expensive than the cost of their current medical care. This allows the government to save money as well as the lift the financial burden from the family of patients who are suffering from serious illness. Some people say that physician assisted suicide decreases the value of human life, but this isn't the case as it actually helps those who are terminal retain their dignity and choose their own death.

Once people are diagnosed to be terminally-ill, they only have a certain amount of time to live, and they know that as their disease progresses that they will only get worse and worse and they will eventually lose themselves. These people should have a choice as of whether they want to live out those dreadful days that lie ahead of them, or to simply end their lives peacefully, without any pain. Physician- Assisted Suicide or Euthanasia allows people to make the decision. Although the end-result of both procedures is the same, the technique differs slightly. In Physician- Assisted Suicide, the physician injects the lethal substances, and with Euthanasia, the doctor only provides a lethal amount of a drug to the patient and they ingest it themselves. Physician-Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia should be legalized as a federal law so that the patients have the right to decide whether they would like to end their lives when in a terminally-ill state.

According to Paul J. van der Wal et al. in ¨Euthanasia, Physician-Assisted Suicide, and Other Medical Practices Involving the End of Life in the Netherlands, 1990–1995¨, he addresses that assisted suicide should be legal and regulated. The authors’ purpose of writing this journal article is to make reliable estimates of euthanasia; to describe patients and physicians, and to evaluate changes between 1990 and 1995. Even though assisted suicide is a growing taboo, it is being practiced more each and every day. Paul J. van der Wal et al. chose to conduct two studies to answer their hypotheses.

For multiple years, the debate on physician assisted suicide has prevailed. Physician assisted suicide is the death of a terminally ill patient, who wants to die on their own terms with the administration of a doctor. This is different than euthanasia because physician assisted suicide is backed by a controlling legal authority (“Physician…”). Some debaters are uncomfortable with the morality issues that arise with doctors killing patients or physician assisted suicide being abused. Others focus on the pain people who are terminally ill suffer from and the control physician assisted suicide gives them. Overall, the right to live or die should not be up to the government. Physician assisted suicide is legal in six states within the United States. Specific regulations are already practiced in five of those six states. Legalizing physician assisted suicide nationally would solve any regulation issue. Physician-assisted suicide should be legal nationwide with strict regulations in order to offer the freedom that the United States stands for.

Physician Assisted Death must be an option to terminally-ill patients because they have a constitutional right to the pursuit of happiness. For example, Wolf Breiman, 88, who had multiple myeloma stated that “Whatever gives you a sense

When it comes to the topic of, should physician-assisted suicide be legal in every state, most of us will readily agree that it should be up to a terminally ill person to make that decision. Whereas some are convinced that it is inhumane, others maintain that it is a person’s decision to end their own life. I agree that physician-assisted suicide should be legal in every state because in most cases, people that are terminally ill should have the right to end their own life with the assistance of a physician.

There is also debate as to whether or not non-participating states should make legislation to legalize this life ending option. Those who are against legalization of physician assisted death often present with the arguments that legalization will lead to abuse of the practice and consequently harsh treatments of our nation’s sickest patients. They also argue that it is an unethical practice in which mortals are “playing God” and determining where the line between life and death is. This group also establishes that physician assisted death is a violation of the Hippocratic Oath in which doctors vow to “do no harm” to their patients. Additionally, they maintain the argument that all human lives have value from the time of conception until natural death and allowing physician assisted death would be a premature limitation of an individual’s life. The opposition, however, says that physician assisted death is a dignified treatment for hopeless patients whose only alternative treatment is prolonged suffering until death. Additionally, they argue that allowing doctors to participate in physician assisted death upholds the Hippocratic Oath because forcing a patient to endure undue suffering against their will is in fact doing harm. Also, a major argument states

Worldwide controversy surrounds the physician-assisted suicide. Some countries have already adopted a policy that protects physicians who assist people into committing suicide through lethal doses of medication such as in the Dutch government. Many people believe that physician-assisted suicide should be legalized on the basis of mercy. Others oppose to such legalization; they argue that by decriminalizing euthanasia, vulnerable population (the mentally ill, those with physical disabilities, and the elderly) may be at risk of abuse (Weiss & Lonnquist, 2009).

Thesis: When it comes to the topic of physician-assisted suicide (PAS), some experts believe that an individual should have the option of ending their life in the event that they have been given six months to live with a terminal illness or when the quality of their life has been vastly changed. Where this argument usually ends, however, is on the question whether physician-assisted suicide is medically ethical, would be overly abused to the point where doctors might start killing patients without their consent. Whereas some experts are convinced that just improving palliative care would decrease the need for someone to want to end their life before it happened naturally.

Evidence: In the Netherlands, physician-assisted suicide was made legal, nationwide, 1981. In the following 20 years, Dutch policy went from PAS in cases of unbearable terminal illness, to legalized practices of extended euthanasia. According to Hendin in the Duquesne Law Review, once a form of “killing” was introduced and allowed in the legal, moral, and medical realms, it was impossible to prevent more lenient policy on assistance in death (Hendin 1996). This rapid evolution in policy leads to further abuses of the assistance in death, including involuntary euthanasia, which go largely unpunished, argued against, or investigated.

"Physician assisted-suicide," "Euthanasia"-call it what you may. This is one of the most emotionally debated subjects effecting our lives today. Generally people in the community are either all for the legalization of physician assisted-suicide or totally against it. There are no laws in the United States making it is illegal to take one's own life. In fact, people all around the world take their own lives on a daily basis either purposely or accidentally. Are you for it or against it? Let me give you an example of why I am wholeheartedly all for physician assisted suicide. My 30 year old brother had been diagnosed with stage four pancreatitis. The doctors stated there is no cure, but could try chemo and radiation therapy to extend his life. My brother was a hard-working, compassionate and free-spirited man. Tom would give the shirt off his back and would pull over to the side of the road to help a complete stranger if they needed it. My brother was very stubborn, so it was no surprise that he opted

First off, physician assisted death should be legalized because it should only be the doctors and patient’s decision. However, I do believe assisted death should be legal but only if a doctor agrees that the extent of illness is not curable and that the person is in a strong

The process of dying is a natural, inevitable part of life. However, in the year 2014 there is no reason we shouldn’t make this process easier for our terminally ill loved ones. The legalization of physician-assisted death can help patients as well as their families in terms of quality of life, expenses, and empowerment.

Today, voluntary euthanasia is getting closer to being legalized in more than just one state in the United States. “‘Voluntary’ euthanasia means that the act of putting the person to death is the end result of the person’s own free will” (Bender 19). “ Voluntary euthanasia is an area worthy of our serious consideration, since it would allow patients who have exhausted all other reasonable options to choose death rather than continue suffering” (Bender 19). The question of whether or not voluntary euthanasia should be legalized is a major debate that has been around for years. Because the issue of whether people should have the right to choose how they want to live or die is so complex. With the advances in technology today we have made

Euthanasia should not be an option for patients to end their lives because euthanasia is not morally justified, and corrupts, while contradicting the point of medicine. Euthanasia also should not be used because euthanasia itself puts to much focus on suicidal drugs and not enough on finding better treatment plans for patients. In January 1991, a Gallup Poll was taken of the broad acceptance of assisted suicide in which 58% of people agreed that a person has the “moral right” to end his or her life when he or she has a disease that in incurable (Somerville, Margaret). How can this act be morally right if it is not morally justified? Do you think doctors by law should be allowed to end a patients life if the