Euthanasia: We Have the Right to Die

Others have argued that physician assisted suicide is not ethically permissible, because it contradicts the traditional duty of physician’s to preserve life and to do no harm. Furthermore, many argue that if physician assisted suicide is legalized, abuses would take place, because as social forces condone the practice, it will lead to “slippery slope” that forces (PAS) on the disabled, elderly, and the poor, instead of providing more complex and expensive palliative care. While these arguments continue with no end in sight, more and more of the terminally ill cry out in agony, for the right to end their own suffering.

Today, there is a large debate over the situation and consequences of euthanasia. Euthanasia is the act of ending a human’s life by lethal injection or the stoppage of medication, or medical treatment. It has been denied by most of today’s population and is illegal in the fifty states of the United States. Usually, those who undergo this treatment have a disease or an “unbearable” pain somewhere in the body or the mind. Since there are ways, other than ending life, to stop pain caused by illness or depression, euthanasia is immoral, a disgrace to humanity, according to the Hippocratic Oath, and should be illegal throughout the United States.

The thoughts of assisted suicide are very mixed. Some people believe that it is a great way to put terminally-ill patients out of the their pain and suffering. They see it as a way for a person to die with dignity after suffering from a painful disease. Others think it is beyond morally wrong for a doctor to intentionally end a patient’s life. They feel that a doctor should not have unnecessary deaths riding, on their shoulders the rest of their career. Assisted suicide goes way beyond the beliefs of medicine and is morally wrong in so many ways.

Though one is not a supporter of euthanasia and/or assisted suicide, circumstances can easily influence the choice to undertake. However, one should not advocate or condone assisted suicide just because a patient feels they should die. The option of assisted suicide (Physician Assisted Suicide) should be left for terminally ill patients, whose death is expected to be slow and painful both to the patient and family around them.

People say that assisted suicide is much better for patients because it is faster and more efficient. Some may even you the word “cleaner”, literally and politically. Though assisted suicide is the patients’ choice, it still leaves a big impact on the family and friends left behind. Some may even believe that the name is tarnished after the person is dead and gone. When death happens, people aren’t going to think about all the good memories and accomplishments a person has made in their lives, they are only going to think about how many pills they took to die or how big the needle was that was injected into their friends’ body to aid in the death of their family member or friend. Physician assisted suicide is preferred because no one wants to suffer in the last days of their lives. In 45 states, assisted suicide is in fact still illegal. So many people suffer until the end. It is good in some cases because when people become terminally ill, they tend to commit suicide in a more violent way. No one would want a person to take their own life in a horrible way like slitting their wrist, so why not let them die in peace. People should be able to die

There are many arguments in favor of Physician Assisted Suicide. Many illnesses like certain types of cancer, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease, and ALS may result in slow agonizing deaths. Many patients decide to use physician-assisted death because it relieves them from a tremendous amount of pain and suffering. A patient knowing that they’re going to die and that the pain is only going to get worse causes them to choose this decision. There’s no reason in letting a human suffer until they finally give out. “When death is the only way to relieve suffering, and inevitable regardless, why not allow it to come in the most humane and dignified way possible?” (Bender 21). Another pro is that health care costs are reduced. Medical care

There are many facts or opinions brought up against the physician-assisted suicide. One of the most impactful oppositions is that the law goes against the Hippocratic Oath that states first do no harm. In the oath, the quote “I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody if asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect.” The counter to that statement is that it is more harmful to do nothing for a terminally ill patient and force them to endure endless pain and suffering when their choice is to end their life (Pros & Cons, 2016). Another opinion against physician-assisted suicide is that by having it as an option it puts pressure on ill patients to take it, so that they are not a physical or financial burden to their families. Some religions see that the physician-assisted suicide is morally unethical. The Catholic Church views the law as morally wrong, killing of a human being, even by an act of omission to eliminate suffering, violates divine law, and offends the dignity of the human person (Death with Dignity.org, 2016). The pope has quoted “Freedom to kill is not a true freedom, but a tyranny that reduces the human being into slavery.” Another opposing viewpoint considers the chance for abuse or misuse by family for monetary gain. One of the hypothetical scenarios is that the family may influence or fool a dying patient into thinking that the suicide is the best for everyone so that they may collect on an inheritance or insurance policy

Physician-assisted suicide has been a questionable act for many years. Some people believe that it is ethical for a physician to assist their patient in suicide, if it is the patients choice. Others have argued that it is simply not right for a physician to assist their patient in suicide. There have also been arguments that legalizing physician-assisted suicide can lead to patient abuse. I personally believe that patients should have the right to end their lives by means of physician-assisted suicide.

The history of assisted suicide is surprisingly long. It finds its roots in the 5th century B.C., when Ancient Greeks and Romans supported the practice. While they didn’t necessary have a strong belief in the value of human life, they

     There are some arguments for assisted suicide and ?Respect for autonomy is one of them. A competent person should have the right to choose to live or die. Justice is another. Competent terminally ill patients are allowed to hasten their deaths by refusal of medication. Physician assisted suicide may be a compassionate response to unbearable sufferings. Although society has a strong interest in preserving life, that interest lessens when a person is terminally ill and has a strong desire to end life. Lastly, legalization of assisted suicide would promote open discussion. ? These arguments make it hard to go along with the arguments against assisted suicide.

Not only is assisted suicide considered murder, it also goes against Physicians’ Hippocratic Oath. “Hippocratic Oath: An oath (or promise) all physicians must swear to uphold, regarding the ethical practices of the medical profession” (Lee). By allowing doctors to stray from this oath, it will be easier for them to aid in or carry out assisted suicides when it will never be entirely necessary for them to consider the option. “In 2005, Texas doctors removed two patients from life support without advanced directions and against the wishes of the patient’s family” (Pawlick). By not legalizing assisted suicides, families will be able to decide when their family member is physically unable to continue with the provided treatments, but only when the patient themselves can no longer communicate their wishes and no document stating how they should go about the situation has been left in their families possession.

The ethical issue is Euthanasia, there are many groups that support or oppose this issue. Euthanasia is the painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma. The different viewpoints are based around whether it is humane to assist someone in dying and whether it should be illegal for someone to assist the death of someone who has a terminal illness and are suffering incurable pain. Groups that oppose the issue generally believe that it is inhumane to end someone 's life early, these groups generally believe these people should be given care and as much comfort as possible until their last days. Groups that support the issue generally believe that if someone has lost their mental state or are suffering unbearable pain that cannot be cured, that they should be allowed the option of euthanasia because it is inhumane to make someone suffer unbearable pain if they do not need to. An ethical issue brings systems of morality and principles into conflict, ethical issues are more subjective and opinionated and generally cannot be solved with facts, laws and truth. Euthanasia is an ethical issue because there are two equally unacceptable options. It is considered wrong

Euthanasia is defined as, "The act or practice of putting to death painlessly a person suffering from an incurable disease." Euthanasia can be traced back as far back as the ancient Greek and Roman civilizations. It was sometimes allowed in these civilizations to help others die. Voluntary euthanasia was approved in these ancient societies. Today, the practice of euthanasia causes great controversy. Both pro-life groups and right-to-die groups present arguments for their different sides. Pro-life groups make arguments and present fears against euthanasia. I contend that the case for the right to die is the stronger argument.

Euthanasia, which is also referred to as mercy killing, is the act of ending someone’s life either passively or actively, usually for the purpose of relieving pain and suffering. “All forms of euthanasia require an intention to accelerate death in order to benefit patients experiencing a poor quality of life” (Sayers, 2005). It is a highly controversial subject that often leaves a person with mixed emotions and beliefs. Opinions regarding this topic hinge on the health and mental state of the victim as well as method of death. It raises legal issues as well as the issue of morals and ethics. Euthanasia is divided into two different categories, passive euthanasia and active euthanasia. “There are unavoidable uncertainties in both active and

It’s essential to understand that there are a few forms of euthanasia. The first form would be DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) which translates to letting someone die. Under this circumstance we are no further helping someone who is suffering from a serious illness for the sake of mercy. DNR is mostly legal under many circumstances such as living will. This can also entail a person to refuse any further treatment toward their ailment that keeps them alive. As a result the person will eventually pass away.