Persuasive Essay On Assisted Suicide

We are culturally ingrained from an early age that life is precious and each day is a gift. Life should not be squandered but preserved.  We are encouraged to live with a purpose, cherish our loved ones and live life to its fullest. But what if life becomes too physically painful to endure, often experienced by many terminally ill patients suffering an incurable disease, or a chronically ill elderly person who lacks the ability to thrive?  For forty-five day’s I watched my chronically ill mother languish away in a hospice care facility. The experience was emotionally and financially draining, and I began questioning whether a person should have the right to choose when and how to end their life. In the United States, assisted dying is a widely debated and passionate issue. Opponents argue preserving life, regardless of how much a person is suffering, is an ethical and moral responsibility, determined only by a higher power.  At the other end of the spectrum are those who support a person’s right to end their life with dignity at a time of their choosing.   Wouldn’t my mother’s suffering been greatly reduced if her doctor was legally and ethically permitted to administer a lethal cocktail of drugs to end her life quickly and painlessly? Wouldn’t the prevailing memory of my mother see her in a better light instead of helplessly watching her undignified death? To deny terminal and chronically ill people the freedom to end their

The word suicide gives many people negative feelings and is a socially taboo subject. However, suicide might be beneficial to terminally ill patients. Physician- assisted suicide has been one of the most controversial modern topics. Many wonder if it is morally correct to put a terminally ill patient out of their misery. Physicians should be able to meet the requests of their terminally ill patients. Unfortunately, a physician can be doing more harm by keeping someone alive instead of letting them die peacefully. For example, an assisted suicide can bring comfort to patients. These patients are in excruciating pain and will eventually perish. The government should not be involved in such a personal decision. A physician- assisted suicide comes with many benefits for the patient. If a person is terminally ill and wants a physician assisted suicide, then they should receive one.

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

Source: Weisstub, D. N., & Mishara, B. L. (2016). International Journal of Law and Psychiatry. Premises and Evidence in the Rhetoric of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia, 36(5-6), 427-435.

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.

Furthermore, the practice of assisted suicide has a significant possibility of being abused. Assisted suicides are designed to allow those who are seriously ill and suffer from extreme pain to easily end their lives (Braddock and Tenelli 1). Those who lack support from members of their family or friends may feel worthless and hence may desire to end their lives (Pretzer 2). If the patient has no loved ones to confide to and receive support from, they may feel as if no one cares and therefore no reason to live exists. Since assisted suicides are unregulated, doctors may allow patients wishing to die for subordinate reasons, such as the one previously stated, instead of suffering reasons to commit suicide. Moreover, “Patients who want to die for psychological or emotional reasons could convince doctors to help them end their lives” (Messerli 3). As stated before, assisted suicides are not meant to allow those with emotional or mental problems to end their lives. If someone has such problems, they should

For a quite a while, Euthanasia and assisted suicide have been a topic of debate. The concern stretches from the legal, moral, religious and emotional basis. The query at hand is "what is the appropriate response to assisted suicide?" As opposed to Wolf's hastened response of "No". It is widely accepted that there are varied reasons for allowing Physician-assisted suicide. However, Euthanasia is not as widely permitted. Reason to this is that physician assisted suicide is not like to be abused; since patients take the last, calamitous step. For Euthanasia, which is Mercy killing; abuse may result with the Physicians patient's relative taking up to advocate for their own wishes the patient having little or nothing to do about it.

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.

As humans, we have the right to life. In Canada, in section 7 of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canadians can expect “life, liberty and security of the person.” This means not only to simply exist, but have a minimum quality and value in each of our lives. Dying is the last important, intimate, and personal moment, and this process of dying is part of life. Whether death is a good or bad thing is not the question, as it is obviously inevitable, but as people have the right to attempt to make every event in their life pleasant, so they should have the right to make their dying as pleasant as possible. If this process is already very painful and unpleasant, people should have the right to shorten the unpleasantness. In February of this year, judges declared that the right to life does not mean individuals “cannot ‘waive’ their right to life.” Attempting suicide is not illegal in Canada, but the issue here is for those whose physical handicaps prevent them from doing so, and to allow access to a safe, regulated and painless form of suicide. It is a very difficult, sensitive and much-debated subject which seeks to balance the value of life with personal autonomy. In this essay, I will argue that the philosophical case for pro-euthanasia is more complete than those arguments against it due to the

The ethical dilemma of this highly controversial subject will continue to split our approach to the notion of assisted suicide. As we age, we come to terms with our own mortality, how we choose to leave this world isn’t always up us. For those who suffer from a terminal fate, maybe they should have the choice, and those who understand their current condition can provide them the dignity they deserve without repercussions. The only way we as a society can move ahead, is to find a common

Physician assisted suicide is an act of compassion that respects patient’s choice and fulfills an obligation of non-abandonment (Sulmasy & Mueller, 2017). Death is the inevitable end of life of a person or organism. As humans, we live the best way we can and with medicine and technology, humans can live a quality and healthy life-style. However, there is no human who is supernaturally immune from diseases and accidents.

What if someone is coerced? Isn’t this an act of “playing God”? (www.DeathwithDignity.org). The Death with Dignity National Center answers these questions along with many others and provides reassuring information that the law is safeguarded from improper use or corruption. The safeguards assure direct, confidential patient involvement in order to protect the patient’s decision from manipulation. It is incredibly disconcerting to think that patients may be convinced to accept this choice against their wishes. In 2013, 4,829 people died of assisted suicide in the Netherlands accounting for one in twenty-eight deaths that year. The Netherlands law does not require patients to suffer terminal illness, and is “technically illegal…Those who aid in euthanasia can face up to four and a half years in prison” (Ross). IT was, however, decriminalized in 2002 “so long as certain criteria are met” (Ross). Assisted suicide was legalized by Canada in 2015, and Switzerland has allowed it since 1942 while encouraging what are called “suicide tourists” (Ross). These facts lead many people to doubt the safety of such a procedure and wonder if it should be a viable, legal

Places all around the world have legalized assisted suicide and it has proven successful in every place. Canada, Japan, Germany, Switzerland the USA, including California, Washington, Oregon, Vermont, and Montana, all these places have experienced and legalized assisted suicide, and every place has had an overwhelming increase in the happiness and welfare of its overall population. Canadian justices, while explaining their change in heart over assisted suicide said, “What has changed...is that other countries, including the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Colombia and Switzerland, plus four American states, have shown that assisted dying can be well regulated” (Last Rights, 2016, para. 4). This in itself expresses that because of the success other countries have already received, the implementation

The debate on legalizing assisted suicide is an issue across the globe. It has brought countries to contemplate on the legalities of the matter in their respective legislative branches of government. Assisted suicide is just simply a matter of assessing one's will to perform such act with the permission of the subject or the patient in such way his will be done. The debate now focuses on either the act shall be legalized or not.

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