Euthanasia And Physician Assisted 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.

Ezekiel Emanuel once said, “Physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia have been profound ethical issues confronting doctors since the birth of Western medicine, more than 2,000 years ago.” Physician assisted suicide (PAS) should be available as a dignified option for the terminally ill because it can be built in to the palliative care plan formulated by patient and Doctor, may alleviate some medical costs for the incurable, and it’s a moderated and humane way to end a person’s suffering.

To fully understand the issue at hand, one must understand the various forms of euthanasia. The Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary: Tenth Edition defines euthanasia as “the act or practice of killing or permitting the death of hopelessly sick or injured individuals…in a relatively painless way for reasons of mercy.” Euthanasia can be either passive or active. Passive euthanasia occurs when a patient is relieved of medical treatment and is allowed to die naturally. Active euthanasia occurs when either a physician or a family member actively takes the life of the patient, perhaps through lethal injection, and eliminates a natural death process. Many people commonly use the word “euthanasia” to refer to assisted suicide. Essentially, assisted suicide is a form of active euthanasia in that a person, usually a physician, aids in the suicide of a patient.

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.

The debate over Euthanasia and Physician Assisted Suicide is becoming more and more complicated as doctors develop a better understanding for its purpose and usefulness. Euthanasia is a Greek term meaning “good death” and it can be described as a killing of a patient who chooses to take this course in action by applying, administrating, and undergoing a procedure to end their life. Euthanasia is prescribed when a patient is in intense pain or suffering and is ready to end their life in a safe and logical way with the help of a doctor. It is a simple procedure with a choice of either drug administration or a lethal injection. The injection is much faster than the drugs, but both work in the same way. The significance of euthanasia is to be able

Physicians Assisted Death, is a death made possible when a physician, provides a terminally ill patient with the appropriate means to terminate their life. In other words, the patient commits the death causing act (Class notes, 10/19). Though Physicians Assisted Death and euthanasia ultimately result in the same ending they are different. euthanasia is a death made possible when a patient who is unable to commit the death causing act by themselves, grants a physician the right to terminate a their life. Thus, the physician administers the lethal drugs. That difference plays a critical role in the legalization of physician assisted death and euthanasia. Currently there are several arguments for and against the legalization of physician assisted death and euthanasia.

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

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.

The difference between the two methods is the initiation or act of death; euthanasia, the doctor initiates death, whereas in physician-assisted suicide, the patient willingly takes the medication, therefore, committing suicide with the help of the doctor’s prescription (Marker 1). Because euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are relatively similar in purpose and function, they will be used in correlation to each other when discussing the use and concerns.

Physician-assisted suicide is when a patient takes his or her own life with the aid of a physician. This could involve a physician prescribing lethal doses of a

Physician-assisted suicide or PAS are deaths caused by a lethal dose of drug, such as barbiturate, that is prescribed by a physician. The physician does not administer the drug; instead, the patient is responsible for getting the prescribed drug in the pharmacy and taking the medication to end his or her life. This alternative option applies to patients who can make informed decision, suffer from an incurable illness, and experience intolerable symptoms (Canadian Virtual Hospice, 2015)).[Extra bracket] Through the years, many activists, particularly those with terminal illness, fought to legalize physician-assisted suicide in Canada. Among these people include: Sue Rodriguez, Gloria Taylor, and Gillian Bennett (CBC News, 2015). [I don’t think this helps your paper to list peoples names, not necessary] Sue Rodriguez, diagnosed with Amyotorphic Lateral Sclerosis or Lou Gehrig’s disease, brought the right to die campaign center stage in 1992. Now, twenty-one years after her death, the Supreme Court of Canada made physician-assisted suicide legal by February 6, 2016 (Dying With Dignity Canada, n.d.). Despite the move toward legalization, however, the debate on this issue rages on among many Canadians. Some people are in favor of the change to protect the patient’s constitutional rights and autonomy, save healthcare dollars, and take away the guilt of a dying patient becoming a burden to their family, friends and healthcare professionals. Although these are reasonable arguments,

Physician-assisted death has been a hotly debated subject in the later 20th and early 21st century. The subject of physician-assisted death and euthanasia brings about a multitude of ethical dilemmas and causes people to dig deep into personal morals and self-evaluation. In this paper the different types of euthanasia will be defined, Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act and similar the laws enacted in Washington, Montana, and Vermont will be assessed, and the roles and viewpoints of healthcare professionals will be discussed.

Thesis: Physician assisted suicide and euthanasia ethical issues from the prospective of health care professionals and ethicists on both sides of the debate holding implications for the practices of critical care.

Euthanasia and doctor assisted suicide are similar but not exactly the same. Many people mistake them as synonyms, however, their meanings differ slightly. Euthanasia or rather a “mercy killing”, refers to when a patient is painlessly killed directly by the doctor, most commonly using a lethal injection, as a method to end their suffering. Doctor assisted suicide refers to when a doctor provides a way for the patient to kill themselves, likely using a prescription of some sort. It is most common in those who are either elderly, suffering from a terminal illness, an irreversible coma, or suffering from an incurable mental disability. Legalization of euthanasia would be significantly beneficial to patients who are suffering and need a last resort

According to the Health Law Institute at Dalhousie University, assisted suicide is “the act of intentionally killing oneself with the assistance of another who provides the knowledge, means or both.” Euthanasia is a “deliberate act undertaken by one person with the intention of ending the life of another person to relieve that person’s suffering where the act is the cause of death (Health Law). As of June 17, 2016, both assisted suicide and euthanasia are legal in Canada as long as the established criteria are met. Canada’s government can pave the way for other countries to legalize these practices if they are able to establish specific criteria, evaluate the implications on religious institutions and individual practitioners, and provide viable alternatives to every citizen.