Of Euthanasia Physician-Assisted Suicide By Paul J. Van Der Maas

Euthanasia is a controversial debate in society today. Dr. Nitschke wrote an essay titled “Euthanasia: Hope You Need it, but be Glad the Option is There”. Dr. Nitschke’s purpose of writing this article was to conduct an essay covering the euthanasia topic. Nitschke is a director of the pro-euthanasia organization, while having a career in medicine for twenty five years. Nitschke fully supports the use of euthanasia.

According to Paul J. van der Wal et al. in ¨Euthanasia, Physician-Assisted Suicide, and Other Medical Practices Involving the End of Life in the Netherlands, 1990–1995¨, he addresses that assisted suicide should be legal and regulated. The authors’ purpose of writing this journal article is to make reliable estimates of euthanasia; to describe patients and physicians, and to evaluate changes between 1990 and 1995. Even though assisted suicide is a growing taboo, it is being practiced more each and every day. Paul J. van der Wal et al. chose to conduct two studies to answer their hypotheses.

Euthanasia as defined by the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary is a quiet and easy death. One may wonder, is there such a thing as a quiet and easy death? This is one point that I will discuss in my paper, however the question that my paper will answer is; should active euthanasia be legalized? First, I will look at Philippa Foot's article on Euthanasia and discuss my opinions on it. Second, I will look at James Rachel's article on active and passive euthanasia and discuss why I agree with his argument. Finally, I will conclude by saying that while the legalizing of active euthanasia would benefit many people, it would hurt too many, thus I believe that it should not be legalized.

The Hippocratic Oath is often seen as the determining factor of all medical decisions, but those decisions can be based off of the wrong participant’s point of view. With a multitude of ethics to follow, physicians have always decided what course of action is the most beneficial to their patients. Living in a constantly shifting society, however, has shed light on the power struggle between the rights of patients and the ethics of medicine. In the case of physician-assisted suicide, the conflict of power should resolve with the ultimate decision-making power resting in the hands of the patients.

Euthanasia, in today’s world, is a word with opposing meanings. Originally, it meant “a good death” (Leming & Dickinson, 2016). Since the legalization of euthanasia around the world in the early 1990’s, the meaning has changed. Several pro-euthanasia sites would call it a humane and peaceful way to end the dying process, by either stopping the course of treatment or the use of lethal doses of medications (Leming & Dickinson, 2016). Con-euthanasia activists are most concerned about the slippery slope idea, being euthanasia is only a half-way house to legalizing murder (Should Euthanasia or Physician-Assisted Suicide Be Legal? - Euthanasia - ProCon.org, 2016). When discussing a topic so sensitive as death, an invisible line appears between a right way and a wrong way to die. By the end of this paper, the hope is to have an educated discussion regarding some social and political inquiries surrounding euthanasia and doctor assisted suicide.

Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide can often get confused with one another and although both are 2 different practices, they share the same end goal; a peaceful death. Today, only a few countries in the entire world have legalized the practice of euthanasia, showing just how controversial the topic has become in recent years. Should someone be able to die just because they feel like it or should valid reasons be required? And who gets to decide whether an assisted suicide is allowed or not? The answers to questions like these are never simple but to guarantee the freedoms of liberty that were given to many in the form of government constitutions, all these questions and more must be answered. Although life on Earth is a gift that was

Euthanasia remains highly controversial in the U.S. because even a state such as Oregon which upholds the Death with Dignity Act “passed by a margin of 51% to 49% as stated by the Oregon Health Authority. Thus, even though Niles suggested that Oregon supports euthanasia, the Death with Dignity Act seemingly remains controversial because almost half of the population in Oregon is against Euthanasia, and there are stakeholders who still challenge its implementation. In the context of this paper, euthanasia refers to an instance in which “the physician would act directly, for instance by giving a lethal injection, to end the patient’s life” (Niles 254). Clearly, euthanasia remains illegal in most parts of the country, and this is because it is a contentious moral and legal issue according to Haberman. There are numerous arguments which support and oppose euthanasia. Even so, the benefits of euthanasia outnumber its detriments. This implies that euthanasia should be legalized across the remaining states in the U.S. The legalization of euthanasia would have economic, ethical/moral, legal, and personal benefits.

Physician-assisted suicide is the practice in which a doctor prescribes a terminally ill patient with a lethal medication as a form of active, voluntary euthanasia. These patients, rather than suffer slowly and painfully, often request this procedure as a means of experiencing a more “dignified” death. The debate surrounding this issue is a heated one, especially among the general public whose attitudes are deeply influenced by the level of patient pain and discomfort (Frileux et al. 334). At the heart of the issue is the conflict between a patient’s right to choose between life and death and, as expressed by one social scientist, “society’s obligation to protect its most vulnerable members from hastened and not completely voluntary death”

Throughout many years, Individuals have struggled with the thoughts of physically harming themselves, which usually leads to suicide. Depression and anxiety are a disease that takes over human-beings self-determination. Many young individuals reach the point of believing, if they were no longer alive the world they are associated with will no longer be dark and evil. Also, older individuals believe if they take their own life, then they will not suffer anymore. Recently in some states, they passed the right to have physician’s helping with planning their client’s death. Physician assisted suicide means the voluntary notion of a person who wants to terminate their own life by ingesting toxic

Assisted suicide undermines medical research and results in fewer progressive treatments. Euthanasia and terminally ill patients stop searching for new treatments because death becomes the cheaper and most common action. Euthanasia always brought up controversy and increasingly gains popularity. Many charts and graphs show the remarkable increase in euthanasia treatments. One particular chart shows that from 1998 to 2003 the number of Euthanasia participants increases by 68% throughout the Netherlands. This remarkable increase shows people aware of their terminal illness feel that death is the best option for their life. (Euthanasia). With the death of so many terminally ill, the research and investigative treatments remain only

Euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are actions 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 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. It was not until the Hippocratic School removed the practice of euthanasia and assisted suicide 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 the argument of the different ideas that people have about the value of the human experience.

Euthanasia is one of the most controversial and debatable topics in recent years. In fact, according to a recent poll almost 42% of surveyed supported euthanasia and 37% opposed (Fig 1). A lot of controversy surrounding this issue stems from the fact that euthanasia has been analyzed not only from juridical perspective, whether or not it should be legal, but also from various social, philosophical, religious and personal points of view. The issue seems to be extremely relevant not only because it is related to basic principles of society regarding life and death, but also it affects every person, especially who suffers from a terminal illness. Furthermore, because of a lack of sufficient agreement among scholars in terms of an adequate definition

This paper will address some of the more popular points of interest involved with the euthanasia-assisted suicide discussion. There are less than a dozen questions which would come to mind in the case of the average individual who has a mild interest in this debate, and the following essay presents information which would satisfy that individual's curiosity on these points of common interest.

This essay is a formal academic manuscript that was written to provide personal bias about the topic of euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide. More specifically the essay addresses the religious aspects of this topic and what role it plays in the conflict. I, the author, am applying to the nursing school at IVY Tech. The audience for this piece of writing will be other nursing students whom will also be involved in this complicated topic. These students will be enrolled in the IVY Tech Nursing program, in the next two years. There are many people will not be directly affected by this topic. Hopefully, this essay will provide an educated opinion for these nursing students. The goal is to persuade any of them to think or acknowledge this controversial topic. The goal is for students to focus on this relevant issue in their soon to be workplace before the conflict is front and center with one of their patients. Many people are brought up with one belief or the other. This essay provides one perspective on the this topic. It pushes the reader to ask him/herself questions, which they may not have done previously.

The philosophical theories and ethics of two philosophers, Aristotle and Kant, offer two differing views on the morality of euthanasia. Margaret P. Battin’s “Euthanasia: The Way We Do It, the Way They Do It” offers three countries’ perspectives on and laws regarding euthanasia and/or physician assisted suicide, as well as evaluations and critiques of their policies. To determine which of these points of view has the most pertinence, all of these arguments will be outlined and consequently analyzed, both separately and in relation to each other. Their differences and similarities will be enumerated and described, consequently their merit will be discussed. Ultimately, Aristotle’s moral theory centering around eudaimonia will be shown to be superior to Kant’s categorical imperative, because of its flexible nature when evaluating the acceptability of euthanasia under different circumstances.