Mandatory Physician Assisted Suicide

One of the most controversial end-of-life decisions is “physician-assisted suicide” (PAS). This method of suicide involves a physician providing a patient, at his or her own request, with a lethal dose of medication, which the patient self-administers. The ethical acceptability and the desirability of legalization of this practice both continue to cause controversy (Raus, Sterckx, Mortier 1). Vaco v. Quill and Washington v. Glucksberg were landmark decisions on the issue of physician-assisted suicide and a supposed Constitutional right to commit suicide with another's assistance. In Washingotn v. Glucksberg, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the state of Washington's ban on physician-assisted suicide was not unconstitutional.

Imagine a cancer patient on a short rode to death. The pain this patient is experiencing is unreal and unimaginable to most. The pain medicine that can be used does little to take the agony away. The doctors can put the patient in an induced coma, but what kind of living is that? It is not living. The patient does not want to go on. Is it so wrong to ask for a way out? With less than six months to live, the patient’s hope is gone. Many argue that euthanasia is not ethical, but is it really ethical to let someone live in constant, horrifying pain and agony? While in some cases having the right to die might result in patients giving up on life, physician-assisted suicide should be legalized in all fifty states for terminally ill patients with worsening or unbearable pain.

My essay topic is whether or not physician assisted suicide is morally permissible. I intend to argue that it is permissible because a competent patient ultimately has the right to choose for themselves the course of their life, including how it will end. To lie in a hospital bed in a vegetative state, unable to see, think, speak, eat, being totally unaware of your surroundings or those of your loved ones nearby speaks loudly of the pain and suffering at all levels for a terminally ill patient. Physician assisted suicide (PAS) is ethically justifiable in certain cases, most often those cases involving unrelenting suffering. While PAS is not

1. (problem – PAS): In today’s society, Physician Assisted Suicide is one of the most questionable and debatable issues. Many people feel that it is wrong for people to ask their doctor to help them end their life; while others feel it is their right to choose between the right to life and the right to death. “Suffering has always been a part of human existence.” (PAS) “Physicians have no similar duty to provide actions, such as assistance in suicide, simply because they have been requested by patients. In deciding how to respond to patients ' requests, physicians should use their judgment about the medical appropriateness of the request.” (Bernat, JL) Physician Assisted Suicide differs from withholding or discontinuing medical treatment, it consists of doctors providing a competent patient with a prescription for medication to aid in the use to end their life.

There are instances when people who are terminally ill or severely injured who want to terminate their own lives. Sometimes, due to the state of their injuries or conditions, those people are unable to end their own pain. It is in many of these cases that the patients request assistance in their suicides. This kind of request is like to happen in facilities where the patient receives long term or permanent care. Physician assisted suicide is a hotly contested issue. There is support for those who believe this kind of "assistance" is morally, ethically, and otherwise wrong. There is support from people who believe that a person has a right to choose when his/her life ends. These people believe that physician assisted suicide is a form of altruistic assistance. There are valid points made by people on both sides of this issue and there is certainly room within the debate to be undecided or to be conflicted. Secondary, tertiary, and long term providers/facilities have the power to improve the preservation of life and they have the power to assist with the end of life. The paper presents arguments of this debate and reflects upon the issues at the surface as well as the underlying issues of the debate over physician assisted suicide.

Laws vary differently across the U.S. and one in particular is only available in Washington state, Physician-Assisted Suicide Law. The law allows people that have been diagnosed as terminally ill to have the option of medical assisted suicide. It allows the patient to go through a process of requests to be prescribed a lethal dose of medication to die peacefully and without pain. The law protects doctors from being criminally prosecuted by the family for abiding the ill family member with the requested drug. The law can be used across the whole country because I do believe that death shouldn’t have to be painful, as long as the estate is ready and the person is of sound mind, it can be an option should be available to those individuals. The

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

Physician-assisted suicide is a topic that hits home to many people, both in the United States and across the world. Currently, five states have legalized physician-assisted suicide in the United States and it is crucial that every state reconsiders their stance on the issue. Each state needs to look at the pros and cons, as well as the implications of their decision on their stance on physician-assisted suicide. Citizens also have a critical role, as they must tell their legislators their stance on physician-assisted suicide so that the legislators can properly represent their states. This paper looks to show the major arguments for both the groups that support physician-assisted suicide as well as the groups that oppose physician-assisted suicide, while also taking other issues into consideration, such as different pressures legalization of physician-assisted suicide would have on different demographics.

The recent case of a woman, Brittany Maynard, who chose to end her life before she experienced the severe side effects of Glioblastoma has sparked a debate on whether Physician Assisted Suicide should be made legal in all fifty states. Some people believe that Physician Assisted Suicide violates the Hippocratic Oath, gives a doctor too much power, or leaves vulnerable groups at risk. Others feel that Physician Assisted Suicide will benefit the terminally ill. Physician Assisted Suicide will benefit the terminally ill by offering the option to cease their pain and suffering with a painless medication prescribed by a physician when they feel their quality of life has diminished, and is no longer worth living. With this option available, people can exercise their rights over their body and life, die with a sense of dignity, make organs available to patients who need them if it were legal, and it removes the physician from the death directly leaving it to be a personal exit to one’s life.

The topic I chose to write about is Physician-assisted suicide. My position on the topic is that I agree with physician-assisted suicide because it helps terminal ill people end their suffering faster than if they waited until the illness took their life away. Also, the terminal ill person decides that he/she wants to end his or hers life with a clear conscious knowing what is going to happen to them taking the physician-assisted suicide route to end their suffering. By the terminal ill person deciding that they want to end their life with physician-assisted suicide they are helping out their family. They help their family by reducing their pain that they feel and also by helping them financially because it is cheaper to end their life with

It is those ideas that get in mind, what life will be with that illness or disease having on your shoulder not knowing what to do. How to get away from that nightmare that has change not only physically, but mentally as well. Finding another way to stop this and not having to think the worst will happen. As to come with this most people with a terminal disease comes with a solution to end this without having to suffer with the pain that is taking away lives. One of the final solutions most do is the help of a doctor to take away the life of the patient known as physician assisted suicide. Unfortunately, people find this as a way to get away from the illness they have and giving up so the ill won’t have to suffer anymore. Even worse this not

Hospice care has not been around for very longs but it is one of the fastest growing medical fields in the country, with over 1.58 million patients being cared for in 2010 alone. Hospice is an important part of caring for terminally ill patients and helps the families and loved ones to grieve.

Throughout the years, euthanasia has been a highly debated topic. Not only has the legality of euthanasia been debated, but also which forms of euthanasia will be used. One of the types of euthanasia has become legal in five states. This form of euthanasia is called Physician Assisted Suicide. Physician Assisted Suicide requires the doctor to provide the patient with the lethal drugs, but the patient must take them. Legalizing physician assisted suicide would change end of life care as we know it.

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.

As patients come closer to the end of their lives, certain organs stop performing as well as they use to. People are unable to do simple tasks like putting on clothes, going to the restroom without assistance, eat on our own, and sometimes even breathe without the help of a machine. Needing to depend on someone for everything suddenly brings feelings of helplessness much like an infant feels. It is easy to see why some patients with terminal illnesses would seek any type of relief from this hardship, even if that relief is suicide. Euthanasia or assisted suicide is where a physician would give a patient an aid in dying. “Assisted suicide is a controversial medical and ethical issue based on the question of whether, in certain situations,