How Patients Should Be Treated Essay

Abstract: This paper discusses the medical ethics of Physician Assisted Suicide (PAS). Focusing on the ideas of legal vs illegal, the different views of PAS will both be addressed. While active euthanasia is illegal, passive euthanasia, or allowing natural death, is completely legal everywhere. PAS will help patients end suffering for themselves at the end of their lives, as well as the family's. The price of the drug may be expensive but the price of medical treatments continues to rise. The Hippocratic Oath does not support the aid in ending a life, however it has been changed in the past. Many citizens are afraid that is PAS was considered legal, it would grow into something even more illegal being debated. Also, the religious aspect of the end of life had conflicting views as some believe PAS is ending suffering, a good deed, and other believe PAS is not respecting a human life. PAS is only legal in seven states but has gained the attention of many others and other places around the world.

Ethics are society's idea of what is right and wrong. They follow rules set by powers like government and other organizations. (“Ethics vs Morals”). When doctors receive their license to practice, they take an oath. It is called the Hippocratic Oath. It originated in Greece and since evolved to serve modern medicine. The Oath states, “I will keep them from harm…” Helping a patient commit suicide would go against this vow to keep patients from harm. It also states, “I will neither give a deadly drug to anybody who asked for it, nor will I make a suggestion to this effect.” Giving a patient a lethal drug with the intent for them to die is a direct violation of the oath they take. Suggesting that a patient misuse a drug to overdose and kill themselves also goes against the oath. (Tyson). Furthermore, the oath declares, “Above all, I must not play at God.” This sentence means that a doctor should not be able to choose who lives and ideas. They must always help to the best of their abilities. The cannot wittingly and willingly kill their patient or help the patient be killed. (Medical Definition of Hippocratic Oath). Undermining the Hippocratic Oath undermines the foundation of the relationship between a physician and his

Euthanasia is a controversial topic regarding whether or not physician-assisted suicide should be further legalized. Euthanasia is the act of a medical doctor injecting a poison into a patient 's body in order to kill them. Some argue that euthanasia should be legalized to put people out of pain and misery. However, others argue that some people with terminal illnesses would do anything to live longer and believe that it is a selfish and cowardly act. Euthanasia is disputable because of the various ethical issues, including, but not limited to: murder and suicide illegality, the Hippocratic Oath, and medical alternatives. As someone who has had many traumatic experiences and who wants to become a doctor, I am very passionate about the well-being of my future patients and the responsibility to do no harm to them. For these lawful, logical, and personal reasons, euthanasia should not be legalized.

In a Netherlands report it tells, “Many physicians who had practiced euthanasia [form of assisted suicide] mentioned that they would be most reluctant to do so again” (Stevens 189). Everyday these physicians are faced with decisions of how to best save their patient. Now they also, have to determine if they can come to terms with ending their lives. The impact on these physicians is tremendous. Kenneth R. Stevens the Vice President of Physicians for Compassionate Care concludes, “Doctors who have participated in euthanasia and/or PAS [Physician-Assisted Suicide] are adversely affected emotionally and psychologically by their experiences” (187). Physicians, who have made the decision to help, face the consequences of their actions. They have helped someone take a life, even if it their own. Death always leaves an impression. Imagine what it must be like to be directly involved with a death. Those men and women in time will have to come to terms with their participation in Physician-Assisted Suicide.

Throughout the history of medicine there has always been a need for shared commitment to ideals of moral, ethical and humane practice. The Hippocratic Oath, created by a compilation of works largely based on Hippocrates, has always stood as guidelines for the conduct of physicians. The Classical oath has and continues to serve well in preserving the sanctity of the medical profession while developing a basis for the respectful treatment of patients. However, this out-dated oath is not equipped to handle the modern trials and tribulations faced by physicians and health care in general. Many of its principles are simply unrealistic and inapplicable in today’s society. For this reason a revised version of the oath was written. As I will

After ensuring the preservation of medicinal practices and knowledge, the consequences of it are realized through guiding ideas. The Hippocratic Oath affirms, “I will keep [my patients] from harm and injustice.” Doctors swear by contributing to the wellbeing of patients, ignoring the various personal effects of ego, sexual interest and human tendency to gossip. Doctors must be able to admit to inability in order to make sound judgements. This would mean diagnosis to the best of their ability, and nothing beyond their ability: “I will apply dietetic measures for the benefit of the sick according to my ability and judgment" (Hippocrates). The oath calls on doctors not to abuse their societal power or fall prey to their desires: “I will come for the benefit of the sick, remaining free of all intentional injustice, of all mischief and in particular of sexual relations" (Hippocrates). The oath further protects the patient’s emotional wellbeing by restricting the doctor from disclosing details surrounding the patient’s physical condition. The oath makes clear, “What I may see or hear in the course of the treatment or even outside of the treatment in regard to the life of men, which on no account one must spread abroad, I will keep to myself, holding such things shameful to be spoken about" (Hippocrates). With the words “In purity and holiness I will guard my life and my art"

Ultimately physician assisted suicide goes against moral and ethical judgment that is placed within the “hands” of a practicing physician.

Over the span of half a century, the medical profession has witnessed a catastrophic shift in the patient-physician relationship. As the manufacturing of new pharmaceuticals and the number of patients under a physician’s care continue to rise, doctor’s are finding it difficult to employ the time-honored principles listed within the Hippocratic Oath. This oath, written in 430 BC by the Greek Physician, Hippocrates, was the first document to state the responsibilities of a physician to his patient (vadscorner, pg 2). Hippocrates believed that it was the physician’s duty, as a healer, to treat the patient infected with the disease to the best of his ability, and not to treat the disease

Physicians should respect the patients decision to abandon life continuing treatment, deliberately causing death is morally impermissible.

It is the conclusion of Marcia Angell from the Supreme Court and Physician-Assisted Suicide in article #1 that a physician’s main duties are to respect a patient’s autonomy and relieve suffering. She believes even if this means assisting in a patient’s death. Her conclusion is based on several pretenses. First, the premise is the most ethical in medicine the respect for each patient’s autonomy. If this principle conflicts with others, it should always take precedence. She argues that sometimes physician’s need the option regarding hastening death, although this should be considered as a last resort. She considers that death is different for all and can be fast and peaceful or slow and cruel. She argues that death if withdrawing life-sustaining treatment simply allows the disease to take its course (Kaebnick, 2001). Three methods of hastening death are: withdrawing treatment to sustain life, assisting suicide, and euthanasia. Her concern about this is this is less patient-centered thinking and more physician centered? She further hopes that it will become a choice for those patients who need

Physician assisted suicide refers to the voluntary termination of the life of a particular patient. It is conducted through administering a lethal substance with direct or indirect assistance from the physician. The case of physician-assisted suicide has caused many debates. Some doctors argue that it is unethical to participate in patient assisted suicide since it violates the fundamental principles of medical practice. It violates the Hippocratic Oath of doctors. This oath states that doctors should always act in the best interest of their patients. It implies that doctors should do everything possible to help their patients recover (Carr, 2010). It shows that participating in physician-assisted suicide is a wrongful act in this case. Some people also do not support physician-assisted suicide since they argue that it violates the principles that Christians adhere to. According to Catholic teachings, it is wrong to violate the commandment of Thou shall not kill (Carr, 2010). It shows that people should not participate in physician-assisted suicide since it is unethical. However, some people argue that it is ethical to practice physician-assisted suicide. It should be performed to patients who may be

A twist on the "patient's perspective" approach is to describe a time when medicine failed to save or heal someone close to you. The purpose of this tactic would not of course be to rail against the medical profession, but rather to show how a disappointing loss inspired you to join the struggle against disease and sickness.

It is argued that patients requesting help with hastening death come mostly from those who have not been treated or diagnosed properly (Asch). “There is a growing awareness that loss of dignity and of those attributes that we associate particularly with being human are the factors that most commonly reduce patients to a state of unrelieved misery and desperation,” (Rogatz). It would be to the doctor’s discretion and expertise to diagnose and treat the patient to the best of their ability, and the patient could seek assistance from another doctor if looking for more

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

Euthanasia is a controversial issue. Many people believe that doctors should not prescribe any medication that ends a person’s life since it is considered to be against the Hippocratic Oath. The Hippocratic Oath states that doctors are professionally obliged to save lives. Some consider euthanasia to be immoral and others say that it is murder. Euthanasia should