Physician Assisted Suicide : Sinful Act Or Act Of Compassion? Essay

Physician assisted suicide, is this an ethical procedure? Many feel strongly on both sides of this issue. Some states such as Washington and Oregon have made Physician assisted suicide legal. Other states such as Michigan and Massachusetts have put the issue to a vote and the voters have turned down the option. What exactly is physician assisted suicide? According to Dictionary.com, the definition is a situation in which a physician provides the means of death for a gravely ill patient .Dehal and Levy explain, “The Death With Dignity Act (DWDA) allows mentally competent,

Physician assisted suicide was brought to mainstream attention in the 1990’s due to Dr. Kevorkian’s “suicide machine," who claims to have assisted over 100 suicide deaths of terminally ill patients with Alzheimer’s disease (Dickinson, p. 8). In the early 1990’s, for the first time in United States history the issue was brought to the voting polls in California, Washington, and Oregon (Dickinson, p. 9). The bill was passed in Oregon; legally allowing physicians to facilitate death of the terminally ill, but voters fails to pass the bill in Washington and California (Dickinson, p. 9). In 2008 voters in Washington State passed the Washington Death with Dignity Act (Dickinson, p. 277). Today

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?

Every day in the United States 1,500 people are diagnosed with a terminal illness. These people are given few options when determining if the wish to try treatment and if treatment does not work, how to deal with the end of their lives. (author unknown, “Cancer”) With this horrible future ahead of them many may wish to make amends before it’s too late, however, an increasing number of people are seeking an alternate solution. In states such as Oregon, Washington, Vermont, Montana and soon California a relatively new, legal option is available for people with terminal illnesses. The states of Oregon, Washington, Vermont, and Montana created a law which allows people with a terminal illness and less than six months that are mentally healthy seek professional medical help that will end their lives (Humphrey, Derek) . This topic has created heated debates across the United States with each side have clear and defined reason as to why or why not this controversial law should be processed for the whole country. The people who defend the law believe that people who are losing their lives should be able to leave this world on their own terms, and with the help of physicians they can go in a painless and mess-free way. Supporters also believe that by not wanting to the end it can help save patients, doctors, and insurance time and money that could be better spent on patients who may have options and may not be able to reach them without

Physician-assisted suicide is arguably one of the most controversial subjects to discuss or read about within our society. This paper will examine both sides of this discussion, from the aspect of the patient choosing to end their own life based on the quality of their remaining life. Also, the religious factors of the medical staff involved and the moral and ethical duty of the doctors to preserve the life of the patient if there are still means available.

Physician-assisted suicide is “the voluntary termination of one's own life by administration of a lethal substance with the direct or indirect assistance of a physician. Physician-assisted suicide is the practice of providing a competent patient with a prescription for medication for the patient to use with the primary intention of ending his or her own life” (MedicineNet.com, 2004). Many times this ethical issue arises when a terminally-ill patient with and incurable illness, whom is given little time to live, usually less than six-months, has requested a physician’s assistance in terminating one’s life. This practice with the terminally ill is known as euthanasia. Physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia is a controversial topic

The process of assisted suicide, or physician-assisted death, is a hotly debated topic that still remains at the forefront of many national discussions today. Assisted suicide can be described as the suicide of patient by a physician-prescribed dose of legal drugs. The reason that this topic is so widely debated is that it infringes on several moral and religious values that many people in the United States have. But, regardless of the way that people feel, a person’s right to live is guaranteed to them in the United States Constitution, and this should extend to the right to end their own life as well. The reasons that assisted suicide should be legalized in all states is because it can ease not only the suffering of the individual, but the financial burden on the family that is supporting him/her. Regardless of opposing claims, assisted suicide should be an option for all terminally ill patients.

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld court decisions in Washington and New York states that criminalized physician-assisted suicide on July 26, 1997.12 They found that the Constitution did not provide any “right to die,” however, they allowed individual states to govern whether or not they would prohibit or permit physician-assisted suicide. Without much intervention from the states individuals have used their right to refuse medical treatment resulting in controversial passive forms of euthanasia being used by patients to die with dignity such as choosing not to be resuscitated, stopping medication, drinking, or eating, or turning off respirators.9

Physician assisted suicide is immoral in the case of people who are alive and desire to terminate their life. However, there are extreme cases when hastening the dying process is justified in the circumstances of individuals who are in intense physical impairment.

A policeman witnesses a man trapped underneath a burning truck. Desperate and in pain, the man asks the policeman to shoot him and save him the pain of dying a slow and insufferable death. As a result, he shoots. The policeman’s dilemma is commonly referenced in support of physician-assisted-suicide, or PAS. Euthanasia and assisted suicide are interchangeable terms which both lead to the death of an individual. Voluntary PAS is a medical professional, usually a physician, who provides medication or other procedures with the intention of ending the patient’s life. Voluntary PAS is the administration of medicine with the explicit consent from the patient. In terms of this paper, we focus on voluntary physician-assisted suicide in the

There are a few different forms of physician-assisted death, such as active, passive, and assisted suicide. To some people they may mean the same thing but in reality, they are quite different. Active euthanasia is when a physician physically injects the patient with a drug that ends their live or in some way is the direct result of the patient’s death. Passive euthanasia is the result of something taken away from the patient that results in their death, such as removing a breathing tube or stopping treatment. Physician assisted suicide is the result of lethal medication given to the patient for them to take on their own time when they are ready to end their life. Some people see these different forms as being the same while others see them as being different. There are four ethical principles that become involved in conflict with these forms of euthanasia. These principles are beneficence, autonomy, non-maleficence, and justice, which act against each other sometimes in the cases of euthanasia. Beneficence is the duty of the physician to have the welfare of the patient is their first concern. This principle sometime goes against euthanasia because of the fact the physicians are stopping treatment, which results in the death of the patient. Many argue this act is the result of not thinking of the patient’s welfare. Another principle is autonomy, according to Steve Pantilat, “Autonomous individuals act intentionally, with understanding, and without controlling influences”

Assisted suicide is a form of suicide where someone helps dying patients suffering from health problems die by taking medicine prescribed by their doctor to help them die in peace without suffering. In October 2015, California Governor Jerry Brown signed a bill to make assisted suicide legal in his state after the death of a California woman named Brittany Maynard (McGreevy, 2015). The Catholic Church was fighting Jerry Brown because they did not want the bill to pass since suicide is against religious teachings (McGreevy, 2015). The California Governor made the decision to sign the bill based on a person’s right to decide when and how to die (McGreevy, 2015). California joined Oregon, Washington and Vermont in making this legal. Other states such as New York, New Jersey, Tennessee, Connecticut, the District of Columbia and Maryland are trying to pass legislation to make assisted suicide legal (McGreevy, 2015).

The World Federation of Right to Die Societies (1980), defines Physician Assisted Suicide( PAS) as a physician “making lethal means available to the patient to be used at a time of the patient’s own choosing.” In a voluntary survey conducted on a random sampling of 40 people, 70% of survey participants could not accurately differentiate PAS and Euthanasia. Euthanasia is a physician administered lethal injection to a patient suffering from an incurable disease (WFRDS, 1980). Dr. Jack Kevorkian was a physician famous for practicing in over 130 cases of euthanasia, due to its illegal and taboo nature this caused Kevorkian to be sentenced to prison for 25 years, for second degree murder (“Jack Kevorkian,” American Decades, 2008). This

Jack Kevorkian stated, “yes, we need euthanasia, for certain cases where people are in comas or too immobile to even press the button” (brainyquote.com). Jack Kevorkian was a physician that believed sick patients had the right to end their life if their suffering was too intense. So many people were attracted to this idea that they could have assistance by a professional in preparing for their death, but it raised a question to the public of whether he was providing an ethical choice. Physician assisted suicide has been a topic of discussion for decades. Physician assisted suicide is when a doctor provides assistance in aiding a patient with their suicide to end their suffering. It raises an ethical issue of whether it should be outlawed

What is assisted suicide? Merriam-Webster lists assisted suicide as “suicide committed by someone with assistance from another” (Assisted Suicide, n.d.). Particularly by a licensed health care provider/physician willing to participate and authorized by the state. The physician will assist with, in administering an approved prescription drug and a lethal dosage. Assisted suicide acts upon the legal request and approval of state law and patient request for the reasons of a terminal condition in order to end unbearable suffering. Not all states in the U.S. are authorized or have approval to perform such patient request. CNN article lists the states mandated by state law as Oregon, Vermont, Washington, California, Colorado, and the District