Patient Request Euthanasia Essay

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.

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.

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.

Should assisted death, or euthanasia be an option for the terminally ill? In 1994, the Oregon Death With Dignity Act was formed, making Oregon the first state to legalize physician assisted deaths with restrictions. As of today, Washington, Vermont, New Mexico, along with Oregon are all legalized in euthanasia. The individuals wanting to end their life must be at least 18 years of age with a terminal illness, be a state resident, and have less than six months to live (Procon.org 2014). The question is, is euthanasia ethical? In this paper, I will be focusing on euthanasia and how it relates to the Deontology Theory.

Imagine living with a terminal illness that causes immense pain and suffering. It’s likely that many of us have not given it much thought. It’s much easier to believe that it won’t happen to us. The reality, however, is that people are diagnosed with these terrible illnesses every day. So, what options do patients have? For many years’, members of the medical community have discussed the practice of physician assisted suicide. This would allow terminally ill patients, many of whom have cancer, to make the difficult decision to end their lives peacefully. Doctors are able to simply write their patient a prescription, designed to end a person’s life in a non-painful way. Doctors and medical personnel have struggled with this topic, exploring the various consequences and benefits that come with making assisted suicide legal. Currently, physician assisted suicide has been made legal across a handful of states in the U.S; however, many people continue to question the ethicality of this practice. There are many different arguments to explore for and against physician assisted suicide. Some believe that physician assisted suicide will lead to involuntary euthanasia, while others say patients should have the choice to live or die. While each individual conviction may seem vastly different, they do share something in common: Their concern for the well-being of others.

Active euthanasia should be permitted as a medical treatment to allow people the right to die with dignity without pain and in peace. Euthanasia, also known as assisted suicide or mercy killing, takes on many different forms. When most Americans think of euthanasia, they think of a specific form that is referred to as “active euthanasia” which means to actively do something that will end a patient’s life with or without that individual’s consent. When euthanasia is performed in an involuntary manner it is usually because the patient is comatose, unconscious, or otherwise unable to communicate whether or not they want to have their life prolonged through artificial means. In such cases, the physician makes an

Some would argue that euthanasia or physician-assisted suicide is a perfectly good process in life. Most people feel comfortable at the fact that it is done in a professional health care facility when the death occurs. People also having the right to choose for themselves if they want to participate in the euthanasia. Feeling like a person has to suffer the mental and physical pain is not good for the person’s health in addition to the other occurring problems. While this option can be abused, some laws are set in place so it cannot be abused. A written, witnessed request is provided as long as the patient is mentally competent. If the patient repeatedly request the death, two doctors have to agree that the death is appropriate for the patient

Voluntary or assisted euthanasia is a complex issue that is often “not fully understood by clinicians” (Ersek, 2004). Currently four states have legalized voluntary and assisted euthanasia for the terminally ill, granted that a predetermined criteria has been meet. While other states that have not legalized euthanasia offer patients the option

Active euthanasia is a subject that is raising a lot of concern in today’s society on whether or not it should be legalized and under what circumstances should it be allowed. This is a very tricky subject due to its ability to be misused and abused. There are a wide variety of things that need to be considered when it comes to who should be allowed to request active euthanasia such as, is it an autonomous choice, do they have a terminal illness, is their quality of life dramatically decreased, and are they in pain and suffering. Both James Rachel and Daniel Callahan have very different opinions on active euthanasia and whether or not it should be allowed. However both authors manage to provide a substantial argument on where they stand regarding active euthanasia.

The democracy of the United States should legalize active voluntary euthanasia (AVE), active non-voluntary euthanasia (NVAE), and physician-assisted suicide/death (PAS/PAD), in cases where the patient has a terminal illness, unbearable pain, or are in a vegetative state with no chance of being revived. AVE is defined as “the intentional and painless ‘mercy driven’ termination of a consenting rational person’s life…” NVAE is conjugately defined as “the termination of an incompetent individual 's existence on grounds that it is in their perceived best interest to do so…” (Richardson 13). Physician-assisted suicide and physician-assisted death are synonymous phrases that may be interchanged (Westefeld 539). For the purpose of this paper, the term physician-assisted death (PAD) will be used to refer to a physician writing a prescription, or allowing a patient to take potential lethal medication after the patient has openly consented. Sometimes, PAD refers to the removal of necessary means of medical treatment, again, after the patient has consented. PAD and both forms of euthanasia mentioned above differ in that euthanasia is directly administered via the doctor, whereas PAD is the doctor allowing the patient to partake in things that could potentially lead to the end of their life.

Today, voluntary euthanasia is getting closer to being legalized in more than just one state in the United States. “‘Voluntary’ euthanasia means that the act of putting the person to death is the end result of the person’s own free will” (Bender 19). “ Voluntary euthanasia is an area worthy of our serious consideration, since it would allow patients who have exhausted all other reasonable options to choose death rather than continue suffering” (Bender 19). The question of whether or not voluntary euthanasia should be legalized is a major debate that has been around for years. Because the issue of whether people should have the right to choose how they want to live or die is so complex. With the advances in technology today we have made

I have argued that euthanasia is not medical treatment and therefore should not be administered by physicians. However, I have also acknowledged that terminally ill patients are entitled to be euthanized if they so desire. This then asks the question of who should aid in the process? Oregon’s Death with Dignity Act, which came into force in 1997, shows that euthanasia is possible without the direct involvement of physicians. The group Compassion and Choices has as a part of its mission, “authorize and implement medical aid in dying to allow mentally capable adults in their final weeks or months of a terminal disease to advance the time of death and end unbearable suffering” . The group works closely with physicians

End of life medical issues are a very sensitive subject for doctors, patients, and family members. Some support the patients’ right to terminate their own life. Euthanasia loosely called physician assisted suicide is when one takes deliberate action to end life when faced with persistent suffering and certain death (Medical News Today, 2012).Many feel that patients should not have to suffer unjustly when faced with serious pain and debilitating illness. Often times it is just as difficult for family members to stand by and watch loved ones suffer. As someone that has witnessed both my grandmothers die on hospice

Euthanasia continues to be a subject of ethical debate. It is defined as the administration of lethal drugs by someone other than the person concerned with the explicit intention of ending a patient’s life, at the latter’s explicit request (Quaghebeur, de Casterle, & Gastmans, 2009).

Euthanasia is defined as “a mode of ending life in which the intent is to cause the patient’s death in a single act (Medical-Dictionary 2003-2017).” With active euthanasia, the patient is usually given drugs to aid them in passing away. About 900 people annually are administered lethal substances without having given explicit consent, and in one jurisdiction, almost fifty percent of cases of euthanasia are not reported (Current Oncology 2011). Euthanasia is for the most part illegal across the United States. Despite this, there are still cases in which patients ask doctors to end their pain and suffering. If a human cannot physically bear living anymore due to terminal illnesses or significant pain, they should not be forced to suffer. When looking at legalizing euthanasia, we should closely look at autonomy, the physician’s oath, and the argument from mercy.