Physician Assisted Suicide

In homes across the world, millions of victims are suffering from fatal and terminal illnesses.With death knocking on their door, should these people have to endure pain and misery knowing what is to come? The answers to these questions are very controversial. Furthermore, there is a greater question to be answered—should these people have the right and option to end the relentless pain and agony through physician assisted death? Physician-Assisted Suicide PAS is highly contentious because it induces conflict of several moral and ethical questions such as who is the true director of our lives. Is suicide an individual choice and should the highest priority to humans be alleviating pain or do we suffer for a purpose? Is suicide a purely

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.

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.

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.

The topic I chose to write about is Physician-assisted suicide. My position on the topic is that I agree with physician-assisted suicide because it helps terminal ill people end their suffering faster than if they waited until the illness took their life away. Also, the terminal ill person decides that he/she wants to end his or hers life with a clear conscious knowing what is going to happen to them taking the physician-assisted suicide route to end their suffering. By the terminal ill person deciding that they want to end their life with physician-assisted suicide they are helping out their family. They help their family by reducing their pain that they feel and also by helping them financially because it is cheaper to end their life with

Hospice care has not been around for very longs but it is one of the fastest growing medical fields in the country, with over 1.58 million patients being cared for in 2010 alone. Hospice is an important part of caring for terminally ill patients and helps the families and loved ones to grieve.

Terrence Jr., Londyn, and Kennedy's father (Terrence's) smoke marijuana in the home. Terrence's girlfriend (Jasmine) smokes marijuana in the home as well. Jasmine has two children (Dallas and Salyha) in the home as well. Both adults sell and manufactured the marijuana in the home. The children have access to the marijuana. Terrence Sr. and Jasmine has unlocked guns in the home. The guns are out in plain view. Terrence sleeps with a gun underneath his pillow. Terrence’s has a gun in his truck. Jasmine’s has a gun in her truck.

Imagine yourself lying in bed at the hospital hooked up to all sorts of machines that are just barely keeping you alive. Imagine the pain and suffering you are in on a daily bass and the medication being given to you isn’t cutting it any longer and all the doctors and nurses can do for you is just keep you comfortable. The doctors have literally given you no chance of survival and death is imminent. You have taken the time you have left to say your good-byes, came to terms with dying, and you are ready to leave this world. If you could choose to end your life instead of wasting away, would you take advantage of it?

The ethical issues of physician-assisted suicide (PAS) are both emotional and debatable, as it ranks right up there with abortion. In the case of physician- assisted suicide it comes to the choices of pro-life, or pro-choice. I strongly believe in pro-life in the situation of (PAS). Some argue (PAS) is ethically permissible for a dying person who has indicated to escape the unbearable anguish at the end of life. Furthermore, it is the physician’s duty to relieve the patients suffering, which at times validates providing aid-in-dying. These opinions rely a great deal on the respect for individual autonomy, which distinguishes the rights of capable individuals

The intuitive account of the moral significance of choice is what Scanlon calls the Forfeiture View, which he then sets against the Value of Choice view. The Forfeiture View places moral weight on the deliberateness and voluntariness of a person’s decision. This view asserts that one has no right to complain about a given health outcome if he consciously and intentionally chose the harmful option while he could have reasonably avoided it as she was well-informed and has access to alternative options through which she would have avoided being exposed to harm. (Scanlon, 1998, 258-9) In other words, what matters is whether one has chosen the risk “with full awareness of the considerations”, in other words, with full awareness of the probability

Physician assisted suicide should be morally permissible. Patients who are in constant suffering and pain have the right to end their misery at their own discretion. This paper will explore my thesis, open the floor to counter arguments, explain my objections to the counter arguments, and finally end with my conclusion. I agree with Brock when he states that the two ethical values, self-determination and individual well-being, are the focal points for the argument of the ethical permissibility of voluntary active euthanasia (or physician assisted suicide). These two values are what drives the acceptability of physician assisted suicide because it is the patients who choose their treatment options and how they want to be medically treated. Patients are physically and emotionally aware when they are dying and in severe pain, therefore they can make the decision to end the suffering through the option of physician assisted suicide.

Lying in a hospital bed feeling, sick, scared and helpless, the only comforting thought is supposed to be knowing that when you need something, a nurse is there to help you. You ring the call bell for assistance in going to the restroom and no one comes. You ring the bell again, and still no one comes. You ring it for the third time and a voice comes over the speaker, "I will be back in a few minutes, I have some things I have to finish up". You need to get out of bed right now, and you can’t do it alone. Now, on top of everything else, you’re feeling alone and frustrated. If someone doesn’t appear soon you will have to deal with embarrassment and shame. On top of being sick, look how many other things a patient may have to go through just

As can be seen from the table, deduction of offensiveness (77.8%) is the most used communication strategy, followed by corrective actions (53.3%). That is to say, Foxconn admits the damage brought by the incident and has taken a series of corrective actions. Secondly, although Foxconn adopted denial and evasion of responsibility countermeasures, the percentage is relatively less (both 31.1%). At the same time, Foxconn also combined the apology strategy (17.8%), requesting for forgiveness of the public. Foxconn used different strategies at different stages of the development of the crisis. In fact, it reflects a trend from conservation to cooperation, which can be seen from the application of each sub-strategy.