Physician Assisted Suicide In Today's Society

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.

Who gets to make the choice whether someone lives or dies? If a person has the right to live, they certainly should be able to make the choice to end their own life. The law protects each and everyone’s right to live, but when a person tries to kill themselves more than likely they will end up in a Psychiatric unit. Today we hear more and more about the debate of Physician assisted suicide and where this topic stands morally and ethically. Webster 's dictionary defines Physician assisted suicide as, suicide by a patient facilitated by means (as a drug prescription) or by information (as an indication of a lethal dosage) provided by a physician who is aware of the patient 's intent (Webster, 1977).

Physician assisted suicide is a controversial moral issue that I feel should be allowed in all states not just a few. Right now there are only five states that have some type of death with dignity law; one which has some extra steps that need to be taken to be able to use the law. Over the last year there has been more media coverage on this topic because of a young woman named Brittany Maynard, who decided to tell her story with needing this option. The real question though should be do we have the right to tell someone that they do not deserve to have this choice?

To better understand physician-assisted suicide, it is important to consider its history in our society. Euthanasia can be traced back to the Ancient Greeks, however by the thirteenth century Christians, as well as Jews, opposed the practice due to religious beliefs. The earliest United States law prohibiting assisted suicide was passed in New York in 1828. During World War II, Hitler organized mercy killing of the sick or disabled; often referred to as, "Aktion T4" this program was enacted for disabled children under the age of three. A Catholic Bishop called the practice of Euthanasia murder; as a result Hitler publicly ended the program, despite it continuing in private. Instead of using euthanasia by way of gas chambers, the use of drugs and/or starvation became the new way to euthanize citizens without causing attention to themselves. (The History Place 1997) The majoring of United States citizens were against the practice for the main reason being religion; however, looking ahead to the year 1972, euthanasia became a more widely accepted act, "The US Senate Special Commission on Aging (SCA) holds the first national hearing on death with dignity entitled “Death with Dignity: An inquiry into Related Public Issues.” The national hearing showed that Americans were becoming more accepting of the act of assisted suicide, yet less accepting of expecting a miracle while witnessing the suffering of loved ones. (Samuelson)

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.

Every individual has to make choices in life; life can be seen as a plethora of crossroads veering off into different directions with every which way. Choices that can create or destroy life; in the blink of an eye a life could end, but in the same moment a new life could be brought into existence. The choice of physician-assisted suicide provides control, familiarity, and closure to the terminally ill patients. The patient is able to choose where he or she will be, when the time is right, and the ability to be surrounded around loved-ones and gain closure by saying goodbye in a timely-manner.

The right to die has been a topic of many debates. People are either strongly opposed to the act, saying things like “In no situation is suicide the right thing to do,” while others argue the exact opposite. No compromises are made as an unstoppable force meets an immovable object, but this is life or death. The answer cannot be as simple as yes or no. We all go through difficulties in our lives, some even struggle with depression at times, but unlike those who are depressed or going through a rough patch, there are those who are doomed to deal with physical pain the rest of their lives. How could we deprive them the choice of a painless death, when letting them die slowly on a hospital bed is the only other option? Physician assisted suicide for those who are terminally ill should be legalized in America, because physician assisted suicide saves those who are hurting from living the rest of their lives in agony.

Those against physician-assisted suicide believe that legally banning the right to die is probable and needed. It is a law that cannot have enough regulations that will protect all patients because loop holes can lead to abuse, privacy, and the actual choice of death. This is described by, “…a legal ban on physician-assisted suicide is constitutionally permissible in light of the state’s legitimate and weighty interests in preventing abuse, protecting patient autonomy, and avoiding involuntary death” (Sunstein 1124). This abuse can be viewed that the poor minorities would be heavily hit by the use of physician-assisted suicide because of their lack of money and representation. These loop holes can be managed though. Being specific in the law

Nowadays, in the United States, people face many big controversial issues. Besides problems related to the reality of daily life like health care, government intercepting phone calls, raising the minimum wage, gender equality, human rights, equality, anti-racism ... have practical effect on social life. People are also really concerned about the issue of physician-assisted suicide. Physician-assisted suicide (PAS) or euthanasia has become a controversial issue today, and that related to consciousness, choices and decisions about life of people. PAS is an action expressing an intention of ending a life to relieve intractable, persistent, and unstoppable suffering. Another idea, PAS is the

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.

Doctor-Assisted suicide for terminally ill patients is a very touchy subject for most people. There are many pros and cons associated with doctor-assisted suicide. In health care it is important to be mindful of people’s varying options on the subject of doctor-assisted suicide for terminally ill patients.

Physician-assisted suicide entails making lethal means available to the patient to be used at a time of the patient’s own choosing. Voluntary

Most people in life have thought about death, those that are terminally ill have these thoughts more so than others. With only six months to live there are many thoughts that must run through any persons mind: Have I lived my life to the fullest? Is my family going to be okay? Am I satisfied with what I have accomplished in my lifetime? Some people are given the heart wrenching news that they only have a few months to live. But what if a loved had to spend these last few months in intolerable pain? This has brought up the controversial topic of physician-assisted suicide. In some states physician-assisted suicide has already legalized. One state that legalized physician-assisted suicide was Vermont, “In May 2013,

Going to your favorite restaurant or watching movies with friends are all things that make life enjoyable. However, what if you did not have these common luxuries? Severely ill patients are constantly controlled by doctors, machines, and medication to keep them alive but do not have the control themselves. When someone is terminally-ill and cannot enjoy the pleasures of life anymore, the ethical guidelines simply reverse. Assisted suicide is a controversial medical and ethical issue based on the question of whether, in certain situations, medical practitioners should be allowed to help patients actively determine the time and circumstances of their death (Lee n.p.). Many believe this is a great step forward in the medical community, and some think it is a big step backwards. Terminally-ill patients should have the right to control their own relatively painless death. Assisted suicide should be a legal option for terminally-ill patients.

Venturing to your favorite restaurant or watching movies with friends are all things that make life enjoyable. However, what if these common luxuries were taken away from you? Severely ill patients are constantly controlled by doctors, machines, and medication to keep them alive but do not have the control themselves. When someone is terminally-ill and cannot enjoy the pleasures of life anymore, the ethical guidelines simply reverse. Assisted suicide is a controversial medical and ethical issue based on the question of whether, in certain situations, medical practitioners should be allowed to help patients actively determine the time and circumstances of their death (Lee n.p.). Many believe this is a great step forward in the medical community, and some think it is a big step backwards. Terminally-ill patients should have the right to control their own relatively painless death. Assisted suicide should be a legal option for terminally-ill patients.