Physician Assisted Suicide

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.

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.

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.

In this chapter we get to see how Lia's fate has really taken a toll on her parents. We also see that the Lee's no longer feel like they can rely on the American medical system after what happened to Lia and instead they would use their own at home methods. Lia's pediatric neurologist also believed that the Lee's might have been right about Lia being affected from too much medication. After hearing this and looking at Lia's records, Neil and Peggy came to the realization that there should have treated her differently. This chapter really demonstrates the importance of culture and the need for doctors to be more accepting and understand of them. Unfortunately, there are doctors who are just not willing to comply. It is sad to see how much the Lee's had to suffer in order for people to open their eyes and it is even sadder that even with cases like this, there are doctors who still refuse to believe in anything outside their medical abilities.

There are multiple types of physician assisted suicide. Collectively, they fall under the categories: active or passive euthanasia. Active euthanasia is when someone steps in and deliberately ends a life. An example of this would be a physician administering a lethal dose of muscle relaxants to end the life of a patient. Passive euthanasia is best described as when a patient withdraws from a life preserving treatment. Euthanasia in general can also be classified as either voluntary, non-voluntary, and involuntary. Voluntary euthanasia is when a person makes the conscious decision to end his or her life. Non-voluntary euthanasia is when a person is unable to give their consent, and another person makes this decision on their behalf. This usually is the case for patients who are in a coma who have previously expressed this wish. Involuntary euthanasia is when a person is killed against their wishes. Involuntary euthanasia is almost always considered

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.

In the medical field there are massive amounts of treatments for various diseases. Some treatments are going to help the patient feel more comfortable; however, some are going to counteract the problem, and others are going to help kill the patient. Physician assisted suicide is defined by medterms.com as “the voluntary termination of one 's own life by administration of a lethal substance with the direct or indirect assistance of a physician.” Any person wishing to undergo assisted suicide in Oregon must be at least 18 years of age and have a terminal illness. This illness must be within its final stages and leave the patient with less than six months to live.

Since 1994, Physician-Assisted Suicide (PAS) has been legal in the state of Oregon. The law allows patients diagnosed as having less than six months to live to decide when they will die. Sadly, death is a fact of life. Losing a loved one to debilitating disease or terminal illness is an experience to which an increasing number of Americans can relate. Every day new cases of cancer, ALS, and other painful, potentially fatal diseases are diagnosed in the US. The American Cancer Society estimates that over 22,000 new cancer cases will be reported in 2015 in Oregon alone, with roughly 8,000 subsequently dying. Faced with such overwhelming diagnoses, many patients choose to fight; other patients opt to spend their remaining time with their families,

I believe physician-assisted death is morally permissible if one relied on the philosophical methodology of utilitarianism. Physician-assisted death can be defined as a patient administered form of death prescribed by a physician. Not to be confused with euthanasia, the intentional killing by act or omission of a dependent patient for their alleged benefit. Physician-assisted suicide comes with a multitude of legal safeguards to protect certain communities, either physician or patient, who might abuse the practice. In order for a patient to qualify they must fulfill the following: The patient must be at least 18 years of age, must be a resident of the state legalized to practice physician-assisted death, two physicians must evaluate the patient

Euthanasia is categorized in various forms. The first category deals with the patient’s consent. Voluntary euthanasia refers to a patient making the voluntary enduring demand to be assisted with the procedure of assisted suicide while involuntary euthanasia is ending the patient’s life without their consent or awareness. Euthanasia is also categorized in the approach the patient’s life was ended. Active euthanasia is ending a patient’s life by the use of drugs with or without the aid of a physician. Passive euthanasia is terminating a patient’s life by disregarding the necessary actions to maintain life such as withdrawing water, food, drugs, medical and surgical procedures. While passive euthanasia is legal in Canada, active euthanasia is considered murder and is illegal.

The topic that my group chose for the AP Capstone group project was Physician Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia, as we all thought that it would be a topic that would be interesting to write about. Additionally, my group was curious about the topic, and personally, I have aspirations to have some sort of career in the medical field one day. Another member in our group was very interested in law, and the other was curious about the topic, so we decided to go with the topic of physician assisted suicide and euthanasia. However, we originally thought that the group paper would be a very easy assignment as we, as a group had worked on other papers together before, but having our papers flow together and editing down repeated or unnecessary information was way harder than I

Active euthanasia is commonly confused with physician assisted suicide. Physician-assisted suicide is performed “when a physician, at a rational request of an adequately informed, competent patient who plans to commit suicide, knowingly provides that patient with the medical means…and the patient uses those means to commit suicide” (Gert). Through this method, a physician does not “actively” kill the person, but simply provides the person with the means to end their own life. For example, a doctor gives a patient an injection of a morphine that is sufficient to cause their death, but does not administer it. In the other hand, a physician “actively” kills a patient to end his or her suffering in active euthanasia. For instance, a physician either overdoses the patient with pain-killers or sleeping pills. Although they are done differently, they both have the same purpose of ending a person’s suffering and pain.

In cases where an individual's quality of life is irreparably diminished by terminal illness, one may seek to end their life with the help of a doctor. This has been a solution for patient suffering in neighboring countries, but there are ethical and legal issues that make it an impractical solution for American healthcare. Considering the results of negative potential of euthanasia practices exposes its flaws, and sheds light on better alternatives. Therefore active euthanasia, not to be confused with physician assisted suicide, should not be legalized in the United States.