Questionable Popularity of Euthanasia/Assisted Suicide
A survey of U.S. oncologists suggests that support for euthanasia and assisted suicide in this profession has declined dramatically in recent years. The survey polled 3299 members of the American Society of Clinical Oncology in 1998. It found 22.5% support for physician-assisted suicide for a terminally ill patient with prostate cancer in unremitting pain, compared to 45.5% support in 1994. Euthanasia in this situation was supported by 6.5%, compared to 22.7% in 1994.
Surgical oncologists were more likely to support these practices; Catholics, those who view themselves as religious, and those who say they have sufficient time to talk to dying patients about end-of-life care were less likely to do so.
Those who oppose euthanasia and assisted suicide are also less willing to increase the dose of morphine for a patient who has unremitting pain despite previous pain relief efforts. "This reticence," they note, "probably reflects fear that increasing opioid dose increases the risks for respiratory depression and death and might be construed as a form of euthanasia. This view may be encouraged by proponents of euthanasia who have argued that there is no difference between increasing morphine for pain relief and euthanasia." The authors urge increased efforts "to educate physicians on the ethical and legal acceptability of increasing narcotics for pain control, even at the risk of respiratory depression and
While the main issue that surrounds physician-assisted suicide is pain control, for the terminally ill, proponents are still unwilling to compromise. However, if both proponents and
Euthanasia is a controversial topic regarding whether or not physician-assisted suicide should be further legalized. Euthanasia is the act of a medical doctor injecting a poison into a patient 's body in order to kill them. Some argue that euthanasia should be legalized to put people out of pain and misery. However, others argue that some people with terminal illnesses would do anything to live longer and believe that it is a selfish and cowardly act. Euthanasia is disputable because of the various ethical issues, including, but not limited to: murder and suicide illegality, the Hippocratic Oath, and medical alternatives. As someone who has had many traumatic experiences and who wants to become a doctor, I am very passionate about the well-being of my future patients and the responsibility to do no harm to them. For these lawful, logical, and personal reasons, euthanasia should not be legalized.
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.
The study also showed that for-profit, small and community hospitals had very limited accessibility to palliative care; and the higher request for physician assisted death came from outpatient facilities. It has been noted that palliative care practices are extremely low nationwide. Neither primary care physicians nor specialists who treat terminally ill patients routinely are provided with palliative care training. These are important facts since statistics show that although most individuals support the option for a physician-assisted suicide the low numbers of actual requests for assisted death reflected the preference of alternative treatment options. As patients regain the power of making decisions regarding their care, aggressive pain control measures are put in place; consideration of physician-assisted suicide becomes an avoidable option for a dignified death. Regardless of the views on physician-assisted death healthcare professional
Physician assisted suicide has been a subject of much controversy in the field of healthcare. A physician’s decision to provide life ending drugs relies on whether or not this practice is legal in their state of residence, the patient’s competence, and whether or not they are suffering from a terminal illness. In a study conducted by Zenz, Tryba, and Zenz (2015), it was found that healthcare providers (physicians and nurses) would rather perform euthanasia on terminal patients over physician assisted suicide. Interestingly enough, this study also found that there is a more general acceptance of this practice than a willingness to perform
A woman is thrashing in bed and crying from the pain her illness is causing her to feel. Her family rushes to find a nurse nearby to administer pain relieving medication. A nurse comes by to give palliative care to the woman that’s in agony. However, the strongest medication that’s at hand cannot relieve the pain without overdosing the patient. The terminally ill patient now has to live with intractable pain for the remaining days of her life. Physician Assisted Death is sometimes necessary in case state-of-the-art palliative care no longer works on the cancer patient. Terminal patients should have the option to control the circumstances surrounding their inevitable deaths with Physician Assisted Death to treat the pain.
A change then comes and starts to make people think differently when in “1870 Samuel Williams begins to publicly advocate using morphine and other drugs for euthanasia,” (Historical Timeline – Euthanasia, 2017, N/A). Samuel Williams was a “a non physician who began to advocate the use of these drugs not only to alleviate terminal pain, but to intentionally end a patient 's life,” (Historical Timeline – Euthanasia, 2017, N/A). Williams doing this resulted in his study “receiving serious attention in the medical journals and at scientific meetings. Still, most physicians held the view that pain medication could be administered to alleviate pain, but not to hasten death,” (Historical Timeline – Euthanasia, 2017, N/A).
Albert Camus once quoted, “But in the end, one needs more courage to live than to kill them self.” Today I will be discussing the topic of Euthanasia also known as “assisted suicide.” The word originated from the Greeks, meaning “good death”. Euthanasia refers to the ending of one’s life, primarily to end suffering and pain. Euthanasia is a controversial topic and generates many political and religious debates. Although euthanasia is illegal in Canada, in some jurisdictions such as the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland and the American states of Washington, Oregon and Montana, euthanasia is a legal and common practice.
In the article “Attitudes of Terminally Ill Patients Toward Euthanasia and Physician-Assisted Suicide,” seventy terminally ill patients were interviewed on three different topics: the patient’s general attitude on legalizing euthanasia, the patient’s personal circumstances, and the patient’s personal situation.
During the process of physician assisted suicide, the physician supplies the guidance and medication, while the patient completes the final act. As George F. Will states, a physician must respect the patients’ knowledgeable choice to abstain from life maintaining treatments. Dr. Lynette Cederquist, who provides pain management for cancer patients at San Diego Cancer Center, is pushing to change California law to allow physician assistance in dying. Advances in public health and medical capabilities for prolonging life intensify the interest for “ending of life” issues. With the reduction of heart disease and stroke, the prevalence of individuals living to experience “decrepitude’s encroachments” have increased. As a result, California legislature has approved a bill for the legalization of assisted suicide. There are many guidelines in place that an individual must meet before acquiring the prescribed medication. A major concern is the financial aspect, as a lower income patient may “choose or be pressured into taking these life-ending drugs instead of pursuing more expensive life-sustaining treatments" (Wagner). There are currently forty-eight states in the United States of America lacking physician assisted dying, but there is a clear desire for the passage of physician assisted suicide in state
Assisted Suicide is one of the most debated and opinionated topic in the world today. Currently, the law in the UK has criminalised assisted suicide, with a maximum sentence of 14 years . Kevin Yuill opposes those who are in favour of legalisation. By referencing the floodgates argument he believes that more people who are not in a critical condition will use assisted suicide, thus exploiting the system and leading into a transition to involuntary euthanasia. He also touches on the flaws in the compassionate grounds theory and the breakdown in doctor patient relationships. Alternatively, other theorists and pro legalisation campaigners such as Tony Nicklinson and Ilora Finlay look at the beliefs of autonomy, compassion and individual dignity where if legalised it can end a wide area of unnecessary suffering.
Surgical oncologists will probably uphold these practices; Catholics, or those who view themselves as religious, and the individuals who say they have significant time to converse near death patients about end-of-life consideration were not as likely to do so.
Furthermore, there were some patients who might actually consider euthanasia. Many also thought it was unnecessary to continue living with such harsh health conditions. With this study it was also realized that the perspectives on euthanasia were not particularly similar between the terminally ill patients. It was a very interesting discovery because there were patients that had two totally different viewpoints. The issue of trust is a very important factor when trying to determine their thoughts on euthanasia. The relationship between the family, patient and the physician were also brought up by the patients. These patients have very different views on the value of trust where some have complete trust, trust with some doubt, and absolutely no trust in the physicians and their family.
Death is a highly emotional topic that affects all of us. We are all going to get old and frail, become sick, or contract a fatal illness. Some of us will end up depending on someone else to care for us, and even financially support us before our eventful death. How we die concerns absolutely everyone. Death is as much a part of life as birth. We need to respect the quality of human life and to alleviate pain whenever possible. Withholding additional pain medication because fear of “addiction” in a terminally ill patient is ridiculous. Prolonging a terminal patient’s agony with life supporting ventilator equipment, electrical shock, and drugs is cruel and unforgivable.
Voluntary euthanasia, or physician-assisted suicide, has been a controversial issue for many years. It usually involves ending a patient’s life early to relieve their illness. Most of the controversy stemmed from personal values like ethics or religion. The euthanasia debate puts a huge emphasis on what doctors should do for their patients and how much a person’s life is worth. Supporters of euthanasia primarily focus on cost and pain alleviation. Opponents of euthanasia tend to focus on morality. Whether euthanasia is legal or not could significantly affect future generations’ attitudes about death. Euthanasia should be legalized nationally because it helps patients that could be in unimaginable pain, offers more options for more people, and it is relatively inexpensive compared to the alternatives.