Euthanasia: the intentional killing by act or omission of a dependent human being for his or her alleged benefit, a highly controversial subject. Assisted suicide: Someone provides an individual with the information, guidance, and means to take his or her own life. When a doctor helps another person to kill themselves it is called "physician assisted suicide" (Euthanasia.com 1). This widely debated topic of assisted suicide is immoral and unethical in today's standards.
Most people who commit suicide or wish to commit suicide are mentally ill and make impaired judgments. Many of those who wish to commit suicide are really just reaching out for help, and disorders such as depression, which lead to attempted suicide, are treatable
…show more content…
The judgment of these people may also be severely impaired at times and they may make rash and unwise decisions (Cannon 1). They may choose to take their own lives or consult a physician about the possibility of Physician Assisted Suicide. These people could be helped if the proper steps are taken and they are reached in time. Having the availability of PAS to ordinary civilians increases the number of unnecessary deaths as well as suicides, now it is just easier to get away with (Langley 1).
There is technology and medicine that exists today that can control pain effectively. While there are still some obstacles, some major efforts have been made to overcome them. Many medical personnel are uninformed and may use outdated or unsatisfactory methods and often do not properly relieve their patient's pain. As a result, many patients see Physician Assisted Suicide as the only way out. For patients in severe pain, administration of an opioid, in particular morphine, has been proven to provide effective pain management for the majority of patients.
A major technological advance in pain management and administering pain medication is called Patient Controlled Analgesia (PCA). With PCA, there is a pump that delivers a constant flow of the drug and also allows the patient to administer their own doses in emergencies. This reduces delays such as having to wait
According to the guidelines, there are three important principles to follow for the improvement of patient safety and care. Non-Opioid therapy is suggested if patients are non cancer chronic pain patients or in hospice care. Additionally, if opioids are needed, the lowest dose possible for the shortest amount of time is recommended to reduce risk of opioid overdose. Lastly, clinicians must monitor all patients carefully when they prescribe them opioid analgesics. Prescription opioid use is not solely the responsibility of the health care providers. There are a few guidelines patients should follow regarding chronic pain to ensure their safety. Patients should become informed about prescription opioids and learn the risk factors involved. Before going to the doctor about pain, they should consider physical activity, non opioid medications, or cognitive behavioral therapy before automatically thinking they are in need of painkillers (CDC Guideline for Prescribing Opioids). Continuing education (CE) is another regulation. While Continued Medical Education (CME) is required in most states in the U.S. for physicians every ten years, there should be a continuing pain medicine education requirement for all physicians due to the heavy increase in prescription
Every day in the United States 1,500 people are diagnosed with a terminal illness. These people are given few options when determining if the wish to try treatment and if treatment does not work, how to deal with the end of their lives. (author unknown, “Cancer”) With this horrible future ahead of them many may wish to make amends before it’s too late, however, an increasing number of people are seeking an alternate solution. In states such as Oregon, Washington, Vermont, Montana and soon California a relatively new, legal option is available for people with terminal illnesses. The states of Oregon, Washington, Vermont, and Montana created a law which allows people with a terminal illness and less than six months that are mentally healthy seek professional medical help that will end their lives (Humphrey, Derek) . This topic has created heated debates across the United States with each side have clear and defined reason as to why or why not this controversial law should be processed for the whole country. The people who defend the law believe that people who are losing their lives should be able to leave this world on their own terms, and with the help of physicians they can go in a painless and mess-free way. Supporters also believe that by not wanting to the end it can help save patients, doctors, and insurance time and money that could be better spent on patients who may have options and may not be able to reach them without
Physician-assisted suicide is the process of certain lethal medications being injected into a patient by a doctor that will end the patient 's life. When William made the decision to end his life by physician-assisted suicide, was he in the right mindset? Would the physician and those involved be charged for murder? And what kind of effects would it have on other people with similar disabilities? These three questions give focus to this discussion of physician-assisted suicide.
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.
Narcotic analgesics, especially morphine are underused for pain control with in the medical field. This underuse is because medical professionals, including doctors, fear patient addiction, side effects and possible lose of their licenses. These fears deny adequate healing and a better quality of life to those who would benefit from a more effective use of these drugs, as done in hospice care.
Another aspect of physician assisted suicide is this procedure devalues the lives of those who are disabled. A family may feel that it would ease their financial burden if their loved one committed suicide and desired to aid them in the process. However, if those are not the true wishes of the individual, how can we put a price on a person's life, the only chance we will ever have to partake in this experience? For a medical doctor, there is a sense of obligation to the individual to ease their suffering. The conflicting problem is that the assisted suicides cannot be effectively and properly regulated; the lines are too fuzzy as to where we can draw the limitations.
Patients would regularly take their prescribed opioid medications in order to relieve the symptoms of their pain. In
Physician assisted suicide is murder. Using euthanasia, increased dosage of morphine or injecting patient’s with a lethal combination of drugs to slow his/her breathing until he/she dies is also murder. Physician assisted suicide is morally wrong. The classical theory for physician assisted suicide is utilitarianism because according to Mosser 2010, “utilitarianism is an ethical theory that determines the moral value of an act in terms of its results and if those results produce the greatest good for the greatest number.” Utilitarianism will solve the physician assisted suicide problem if all of the physicians will stand by the oath they say. According to the Hippocratic
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.
Opioids are effective for the treatment of acute pain, such as pain following surgery. They have also been found to be important in palliative care (hospice) to help with the severe, chronic, disabling pain that may occur in some terminal conditions such as cancer. In many cases opioids are successful long-term care strategies for those with chronic cancer pain (CCP). There are not many alternatives for those with CCP like there are for those suffering acute or chronic non cancer pain (CNCP). In one study, conducted by Furlan et al. (2006), opioids were effective in the treatment of CNCP overall; they reduced pain and improved functional outcomes better than placebo. Strong opioids (oxycodone and morphine) were significantly superior, to naproxen and nortriptyline (respectively) for pain relief but not for functional outcomes. Unfortunately, Weak opioids (propoxyphene, tramadol and codeine) did not significantly outperform NSAIDs or TCAs for either pain relief or functional outcomes. Overall, if opioids are
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.
A policeman witnesses a man trapped underneath a burning truck. Desperate and in pain, the man asks the policeman to shoot him and save him the pain of dying a slow and insufferable death. As a result, he shoots. The policeman’s dilemma is commonly referenced in support of physician-assisted-suicide, or PAS. Euthanasia and assisted suicide are interchangeable terms which both lead to the death of an individual. Voluntary PAS is a medical professional, usually a physician, who provides medication or other procedures with the intention of ending the patient’s life. Voluntary PAS is the administration of medicine with the explicit consent from the patient. In terms of this paper, we focus on voluntary physician-assisted suicide in the
The availability of prescription painkillers has increased substantially, painkillers are drugs that deal with the nervous system, it blocks pain and the patient will feel a “high”. The most common prescribed drugs
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.
Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are actions that hit at the core of what it means to be human - the moral and ethical actions that make us who we are, or who we ought to be. Euthanasia, a subject that is so well known in the twenty-first century, is subject to many discussions about ethical permissibility which date back to as far as ancient Greece and Rome , where euthanasia was practiced rather frequently. It was not until the Hippocratic School removed it from medical practice. Euthanasia in itself raises many ethical dilemmas – such as, is it ethical for a doctor to assist a terminally ill patient in ending his life? Under what circumstances, if any, is euthanasia considered ethically appropriate? More so, euthanasia raises