Is Assisted Suicide Right Or Wrong

Daniel Sulmasy is a Professor of Medicine and Ethics at the University of Chicago and has a particular interest in end-of-life care. He harshly criticizes Physician-assisted suicide and claims that this violates not only ethic principles but is also bad medicine and undermines the intrinsic worth of human life. He identifies patients as being vulnerable and helpless and even implicates rising costs of health care as a possible reason for the medical community wanting to legalize assisted suicide. I am disappointed by his superficial reasoning and I will quote Dr. Sulmasy to exhibit a one-dimensional point of view that overlooks the desperate situation of a terminally ill patient wishing to end his or her life in dignity as a personal

After all the criteria of carrying out assisted suicide have been met, the method applied in assisted suicide is that patients are injected a fatal dose of medication by assistors. And ideally, the patient’s physician

Additionally, the term “euthanasia” does not mean the same thing as assisted suicide. Often people confuse these processes when they differ immensely. Despite this, they remain similar in their resulting death of a human life through the help of a physician. Euthanasia is the direct killing of a patient by a physician by means of lethal injection and it is completely controlled by the doctor. On the other hand, patients in assisted suicide have full control over the process that leads to their death. For this reason, procedures of these sorts must be eliminated as medical treatments and should not be authorized. Consequently, physician assisted suicide has been proven to lead to euthanasia in some cases. Assisted suicide should become illegal in all fifty states of the United States of America because it raises religious concern, endorses legalized murder, puts vulnerable people at risk of abuse, and

Assisted-suicide is a over dramatic expression for patient autonomy. Patient autonomy is defined as an “individual’s right to decide what to do with his or her own body, and the duty of the physician to relieve the patient’s suffering” (Rogatz 1). A patient should certainly have the right to choose what happens to his or her own body. The life of a patient should not be put solely into the hands of a doctor. If the he or she so chooses, physician-assisted suicide should be made available to the terminally ill. A physician, although it should be their obligation to help a patient, should not feel obligated to be the assistant in a person’s suicide. Assisted suicide is a source of “empowerment” for the patients, using “self-determination”, to make them feel as if they have a place in their treatment and to retain their dignity by maintaining their mental faculties by the end of their time (Salem 2).

Assisted suicide is a controversial topic, with surprisingly realistic and convincing arguments from each side. The opposing side of the argument inflicts moral responsibility in anyone researching the topic. The supporters of assisted suicide impose a common argument, “my body, my choice.”.

In today’s society, suicide, and more controversially, physician assisted suicide, is a hotly debated topic amongst both every day citizens and members of the medical community. The controversial nature of the subject opens up the conversation to scrutinizing the ethics involved. Who can draw the line between morality and immorality on such a delicate subject, between lessening the suffering of a loved one and murder? Is there a moral dissimilarity between letting someone die under your care and killing them? Assuming that PAS suicide is legal under certain circumstances, how stringent need be these circumstances? The patient must be terminally ill to qualify for voluntary physician-assisted suicide, but in the eyes of the non-terminal patients with no physical means to end their life, the ending of their pain through PAS may be worth their death; at what point is the medical staff disregarding a patient’s autonomy? Due to the variability of answers to these questions, the debate over physician-assisted suicide is far from over. However, real life occurrences happen every day outside the realm of debate and rhetoric, and decisions need to be made.

"I'm doing everything that I can to extend my life. No one should have the right to prolong my death." That is what Californian, cancer patient, Jennifer Glass said to her state legislators. Glass died August 11th without the help of life ending drugs. The topic of Physician-Assisted Suicide is a very controversial one. There are those that support the topic, and those that don’t. The supporters of legalizing assisted suicide say that “all persons have a moral right to choose freely what they will do with their lives as long as they inflict no harm on others.” (Claire Andre and Manuel Velasquez, A Right or a Wrong?) Others argue that society has a moral duty to protect and preserve all life, and that allowing people to assist in the death of

Who dictates how you live your life? How does one define life and when that life should end? If you become terminally ill, would you like the choice to choose how your life ends? In the United States, assisted suicide, is a highly-debated issue. On one side, there are many in support of allowing a person the right to end their life with dignity at the time of their choosing. While others believe, it is a moral right to sustain life and leave a person’s exit from this world to a higher power. The two opposing viewpoints have both compassionate reasons and disadvantages; nevertheless, a person’s human rights as an individual are the most important aspect to uphold.

The issues surrounding assisted suicide are multifaceted. One could argue the practice of assisted suicide can appear to be a sensible response to genuine human suffering. Allowing health care professionals to carry out these actions may seem appropriate, in many cases, when the decision undoubtedly promotes the patient's autonomy. From this viewpoint, the distinctions made between assisted suicide and the withholding of life-sustaining measures appears artificial and tough to sustain. In many cases, the purpose and consequences of these practices are equivalent. On the contrary, if

If someone in your family was in coma and the doctor said it was very unlikely, almost impossible that they will come out of it and it is your choice to let them continue to let them suffer or die with no pain. Or if you were suffering and the suffering with a terminal disease and was given a choice for assisted suicide. In certain situations such as assisted suicide, euthanasia, and in George and Lennie's case killing another is justifiable.

Many people in the world are suffering from illness that cannot be cured. They live their last days in pain and suffering wondering when and why it happened to them. Instead of suffering, many people dream of suicide to take their pain away but they know no one would understand. In very few states, it is legal for people to get assistance to put them out of their pain and suffering. It is called assisted suicide. Assisted suicide is the help from a physician to end their patients’ lives with their permission. The patient must have a terminal illness with less than six months to live to qualify. Many people are against assisted suicide because they believe that it is just a cover for murder. People should be thought of as dying with dignity

Is assisted suicide an act of good or bad, an act of right or wrong? A very controversial topic in today’s talk. Assisted suicide, also known as another individual helping or aiding another individual to end his or her life. A more proper definition is: the suicide of a patient suffering from an incurable disease done by taking lethal drugs. This is very familiar to occur in the health field. Even though it is not legal all around the world, licensed doctors have the permission to medically end an ills patient’s life. Some states want to further enact on this movement. The Humane and Dignified Death Act, is what will allow a physician to end the life of a terminally ill patient only on the request of the patient and the patient is to have valid

Assisted suicide is a humane way that the terminally ill can end there life, to get rid of the dreaded never ending pan, to end their suffering and just

Assisted suicide is a topic that has ignited a severe debate due to the controversy that surrounds its implementation. Assisted suicide occurs when a patients expresses their intention to die and request a physician to assist them in the process. Some countries like Oregon, Canada, and Belgium have legalized the process terming it as an alternative to prolonged suffering for patients who are bound to die. Unlike euthanasia where a physician administers the process, assisted suicide requires that the patient voluntarily initiates and executes the process. Although there exists concession such a process is important to assist patients die without much suffering, there has emerged criticism on its risk of abuse and as an expression of medical

"Only because I knew that I could not and would not kill my patients was I able to enter most fully and intimately into caring for them as they lay dying (Doerflinger, Richard M., M.D, and Carlos F. Gomez, Ph.D). In this quote given by a physician, one sees that even from a professional’s standpoint on physician-assisted suicide, one is opposed to that act of helping someone to take his or her own life. When given the opportunity, this physician would rather help to improve the life of the patient rather than ending a life that does not need to end and that is the viewpoint that all should take on this controversial topic. Throughout this paper, one will see just how affected people are by the repercussions