Essay On Physician Assisted Suicide

In homes across the world, millions of victims are suffering from fatal and terminal illnesses.With death knocking on their door, should these people have to endure pain and misery knowing what is to come? The answers to these questions are very controversial. Furthermore, there is a greater question to be answered—should these people have the right and option to end the relentless pain and agony through physician assisted death? Physician-Assisted Suicide PAS is highly contentious because it induces conflict of several moral and ethical questions such as who is the true director of our lives. Is suicide an individual choice and should the highest priority to humans be alleviating pain or do we suffer for a purpose? Is suicide a purely

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.

Alma Moctezuma Western Governors University WGU Student ID # 000429008 Thesis statement: Research suggests the legalization of assisted suicide is necessary throughout all states in the U.S. because it will give a human being the moral right to choose freely, provide them with an opportunity for death with dignity, and allow for the option of timely organ donation. Annotated Bibliography CNN U.S. Edition.

In the article “Safeguards Can Prevent the Abuse of Physician-Assisted Suicide” by Sherwin Nuland, the author describes the encounter with an oncologist who assisted 25 patients in PAS. He remembers hearing the backlash the physician received and sat quietly knowing he helped his patients do the same. It is done for patients who have already established a well relationship with their doctor and know that death is the only relief they can get. The author describes it as an act of murder instead of murder. Most people argue that if they allow euthanasia to be used for legal purposes, the criteria for which a patient is a “good candidate” can become less rigid as time goes on. The author states, “Once we permit active euthanasia, where will it take us? Will the rigid criteria loosen? Will we end up turning a blind eye to things that in the present debate we might consider morally questionable?” (124). Physicians fear that sooner or later, the same euthanasia used for a 70-year-old patient with an inoperable brain tumor will be used for a 50 year old patient who has been having major depressive episodes for a number of

Physician-assisted suicide is controversial in healthcare and political realms alike. Currently, this end-of-life option is practiced in five states within the United States. Social concerns regarding assisted suicide revolve around ethical quandaries; providing the means to a patient’s death is contradictory to ethical principles of healthcare providers. Political concerns surrounding the legalization of assisted suicide include disparities in healthcare that may lead to certain populations choosing assisted suicide and the stagnation of current care options. While there is no succinct manner in which to declare assisted suicide right or wrong, each individual must address the social and political concerns surrounding the issue when voting for legislation to legalize assisted suicide or pursuing the option for themselves.

Physician Assisted Suicide (PAS) has grown into quite a contentious topic over the years. According to Breitbart and Rosenfeld (1), physician-assisted suicide can be defined as “a physician providing medications or advice to enable the patient to end his or her own life.” One may find many articles that are written by physicians, pharmacists, patients, and family of patients who receive PAS; from there, it is possible to gain a better understanding of what PAS is and how it has become a rising issue in the United States. For readers who have not heard about PAS and what it entails, it is important to understand that this is a debatable topic that should be approached lightly and non-aggressively in the United States when factors such as offering terminally ill patients the right to end their suffering, the likelihood of overall healthcare cost to decrease, and the comparison of palliative care to physician-assisted suicide are examined.

Those opposed to legalizing physician-assisted suicide make credible claims that miracles do happen, doctors and families may be prompted to give up on their patients and loved ones too soon, and that doctors would be given too much power which may lead to corruption or unethical decision making. Activists for the legalization of physician-assisted suicide also make valid points that assisting those who wish to die in doing so would free up time for doctors and nurses to care for those not terminally ill, reduce healthcare costs for families, and allow for organs to be saved and donated to those in need of

Evidence of physician-assisted suicide can be traced back to ancient times, especially to ancient Greece or Rome . In fact, the term “euthanasia” comes from the Greek term “a good death” . This controversy has carried over into the modern era, and much of the world is still fragmented over this specific issue; particularly, the United States proves to be split nearly 50-50 on the topic. A poll taken in the United States in 2011 shows that Americans skew slightly toward thinking that physician-assisted suicide is morally wrong, with 48% of Americans thinking it is morally wrong and 45% of Americans thinking it is morally acceptable . However, by changing the phrasing of the question and asking if an individual has a right to end his or her own

For example, one point is “Catholic Church teaches that physician-assisted suicide gravely violates the sacred value of all human life, particularly of those who are vulnerable due to illness, age or disability, and undermines the medical profession’s healing mission. A choice to take one’s life is a supreme contradiction of freedom, a choice to eliminate all choices. And a society that devalues some people’s lives, by hastening and facilitating their deaths, will ultimately lose respect for their other rights and freedoms.” (“Know the facts; Physician-Assisted Suicide”). This tell us that most religious people don’t accept how people should end their life. Without letting them decide how to die will make them feel like prisoners in their painful life. Another article suggest that “some doctors object to it on religious or moral grounds or describe it as a slippery slope that could lead to patients feeling pressured to end their lives”.(Schierhorn). This tell us that some patients that decide to do physician-assisted suicide, don’t feel ready to die and they just do it to end their painful life. Without letting patients think about this process, they well never know if they could life a little longer. Another article suggest that physician-assisted suicide cause more harm the good (“Physician-Assisted Suicide”).This tell us that physician-assisted suicide this not as pretty and less harm

According to data from Washington and Oregon in 2012, there were 160 physician-assisted suicides and 90 percent of these deaths were of patients in hospices care. This poses a unique issue for hospice caregivers because on one hand they are not looking to prolong life, but on the other hand they are also not looking to hasten the process. There will always be a debate in hospices on whether or not physicians should assist in suicide of patients (Campbell & Cox, 26). Because a vast majority of the patients who opt for physician-assisted suicide are in hospice care, Hospice physicians are often referred to when a patient is considering physician assisted suicide. Even with the laws in Oregon allowing physician assisted suicide, many hospices refuse to condone it and many hospices will not perform physician assisted suicide. They refuse to perform assisted death because they seek to remain faithful to the historically formative values of hospice care. These include the philosophy that “death is a natural continuation of the human lifespan, that the dignity of each dying patient should be affirmed, that the quality of a patients remaining life should be promoted through the highest level of caring commitment, and that hospices should evince a distinctive devotion to symptom and pain management.” (Campbell and cox 27). Another reason certain hospices do not allow physician assisted suicide is because they are religiously affiliated. They are restricted from administering physician-assisted suicide because it is against their religion to do

Public support for physician assisted suicide was confined to the limited situation where a terminally ill patient would ask a doctor for help to commit suicide. Fifty four percent thought that doctors should

Euthanasia and physician assisted suicide are both types of medical assistance aiding in ending a suffering patient’s life. This pain may be due to a terminal illness and suffering as well as those in an irreversible coma. This practice of doctor assisted suicide is illegal in many countries, but is increasing in popularity as people start to recognize the positive aspects that euthanasia has to offer for those that fit the criteria. Euthanasia is essential for those, placed in such life diminishing situations, and whom no longer want to experience suffering. This is where the issue gets complicated, and many religious groups argue that individuals should not have the legal right to choose whether they get to die or not, but that it is simply in God’s hands. Suffering patients argue that they should be given the right to choose whether or not they have to experience this suffering, to end their life with the dignity they still have, and to alleviate the stress that their deteriorating life conditions have on their families, themselves and the entire healthcare system. Therefore, despite the many arguments, euthanasia can have a very positive impact on the lives and families of suffering individuals, as well as the Canadian healthcare system.

* Researchers at Duke University recently surveyed hundreds of frail elderly patients receiving outpatient treatment and their families. The elderly patients themselves strongly opposed physician-assisted suicide: only 34% favored legalization, with support even lower among female and black patients. But 56% of their younger relatives favored it, and they were usually wrong in predicting the elderly patients' views.

Age, political orientation, religious affiliation, and education were found to have no relationship toward the favoring of physician-assisted suicide. It was thought that those younger in age, specifically eighteen to twenty-five would be more likely to favor physician-assisted suicide. This was on the premise that the younger generation would lean more toward pro-choice views. However, there was very little variation between ages of those that took the survey. This is most likely due to the surveys being distributed on a college campus where the age range is predominately eighteen to twenty-five. More variation among the ages would need to be established for clearer

In conclusion, much of the data agrees, religiosity should have an inverse relationship with opinions on doctor assisted suicide. Religiosity, as well as, race and denomination seem to be significant predictors when assessing the likelihood of supporting or opposing euthanasia or doctor assisted suicide. The most difficult part of analyzing previous research is understanding if all the researchers define certain concepts in the same way. This makes it hard to adequately compare studies due to the possible misalignment of data from one author to the next. It is also difficult to remove bias in studies such as these. When asking people to self-assess their religiosity, it could be very difficult for them to give an accurate answer for fear