Should Physician Assisted Suicide Be Legalized

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.

However, there is immense criticism on the morality of the process, especially because the process denies a patient the right to natural death. The critics of the assisted suicide procedure argue that such a process devalues human life and tends to promote suicide as an alternative to personal suffering. By claiming that the procedure allows terminally ill patients to initiate dignity at death is flawed because the purpose of medical profession is to ensure a dignified life. According to the physicians’ code of ethics and the Hippocratic Oath, physicians are not allowed to do harm to their patients because their role is to allow a dignified health for members of the community. Consequently, legalization of Physician Assisted suicide that requires physicians to assist the patients to die is against their medical ethics. Quill, Cassel, & Meier (2010) provide that although the patients voluntarily ask the medical practitioners to assist in the process, the practitioners have a role to advise the patients against such a procedure. Besides, such a premise is bound to raise awareness of suicide as an alternative to suffering within the public domain, which may encourage such behavior among healthy members of the community that feel that they enjoy the freedom to make such a decision. On this basis, the negative moral implication of assisted suicide makes its legalization unworthy in the

Physician-assisted suicide is a topic that hits home to many people, both in the United States and across the world. Currently, five states have legalized physician-assisted suicide in the United States and it is crucial that every state reconsiders their stance on the issue. Each state needs to look at the pros and cons, as well as the implications of their decision on their stance on physician-assisted suicide. Citizens also have a critical role, as they must tell their legislators their stance on physician-assisted suicide so that the legislators can properly represent their states. This paper looks to show the major arguments for both the groups that support physician-assisted suicide as well as the groups that oppose physician-assisted suicide, while also taking other issues into consideration, such as different pressures legalization of physician-assisted suicide would have on different demographics.

Physician-assisted suicide may change the perception of illness, disease, and pain. Because of this, physicians, patients, and family members may give up on recovery early (Westefeld, et al., 239). In contrast of cooperating in the death of a patient, people will seek to avoid it. This avoidance and denial of death may cause physicians to abandon their patients. This problem would be worsened by legalizing physician-assisted suicide because it would encourage the use of physician-assisted suicide when their disease worsened (Shannon & Kockler, 190). Legalizing physician-assisted suicide would also change the perspective the patient has about him or herself. The moral question of suicide is whether humans should have this responsibility over their own lives. Many argue that this act defies human dignity and that physician-assisted suicide exceeds human responsibility. Also, many people would assume sympathy in this situation, but some people may judge the patient for their use of physician-assisted suicide because it is using suicide to relieve pain (Shannon & Kockler, 191).

Those opposed to legalizing physician-assisted suicide make credible claims that miracles do happen, doctors and families may be prompted to give up on their patients and loved ones too soon, and that doctors would be given too much power which may lead to corruption or unethical decision making. Activists for the legalization of physician-assisted suicide also make valid points that assisting those who wish to die in doing so would free up time for doctors and nurses to care for those not terminally ill, reduce healthcare costs for families, and allow for organs to be saved and donated to those in need of

Physician-assisted suicide is one of the most controversial subjects in the medical field. Whether the debate is, “Should a doctor be allowed to assist in someone’s suicide?” or, “Is it the right thing to do for a dying patient?” Seeing a loved one in pain can possibly be one of the hardest things to do. But what if they were given the option to the stop the suffering? Knowing that death may be months, weeks, or days away comes along with a lot of time at hospitals, pain, and suffering. Giving terminally ill patients an option of physician-assisted suicide allows the patient to be in charge of ending all their pain and suffering they will go through as well as passing at the comfort of their family at home and not in a hospital bed.

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.

Assisted suicide is a controversial and often misunderstood topic that has recently raised the attention of the nation. Assisted suicide or physician assisted suicide (PAS) is not only an emotionally trying matter but also ethically challenging to some. Those who are against this act believe that it is unethical to end a life before the intended time. Those in favor believe that it is a human right for patients that have terminal illnesses to have a choice in the way that they die. Physician assisted suicide should be legalized for mentally competent adults because it is a human right, is more financially responsible and a considerate reply to the misery of

A second chart is presented that specifies the arguments in favor of and against physician assisted suicide. Arguments in favor of euthanasia include: the right to self-determination, the fact that it relieves suffering, the idea that assistance in dying is logical and reasonable, and the fact that physicians no longer have to accept patients’ request to limit interventions. Arguments against physician assisted suicide include: the fact that taking a human life is inherently wrong, the belief that respect for human life must be balanced by other views, the idea that it is different from other managements aimed at alleviating suffering, the fact that the domino effect is bound to happen, and the idea that it goes against the doctor-patient relationship and the role of the physician as a

It is obvious discussing physician-assisted suicide is a very controversial issue that is discussed daily by those who wish to die to avoid loss of dignity and also by those who think it is unethical. For physician-assisted suicide to even be considered, the patient must be of sound mind when they are requesting death with dignity. Physician-assisted suicide should be a legal option for people who are unable to end their own lives. However, there should be safeguards to prevent any sort of abuse. There should be the legalization of physician-assisted suicide, but not for active euthanasia. “It should never be contemplated as a substitute for comprehensive comfort care or for working with patients to resolve the physical, personal, and social challenges posed by the process of dying” (Meier, D.E., p. 294). If an incurable patient who is suffering asks for specific help in physician-assisted suicide, physicians should have the obligation to fully scrutinize the request. Not only is it the seriousness of considering medicine as the placement of certain suicide an issue, it is a form of direct killing. Medical advances are surely making it easier to reduce pain and suffering, so why should there be policies devised and sanctioned by the state to kill those in pain and suffering?

All around the world, most specifically the U.S., Assisted Suicide has been debated by courts, people and physicians. It’s one of the most prominent topics among the states. The statistics state that 68% of Americans think that doctors should be allowed to assist terminally ill patients in death. (Dugan 1)

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.

A vast majority of the opposing force is against legalization of physician assisted suicide for “moral” or religious reasons. It is also commonly argued that participating in assisted suicide is incompatible with the physician’s duty as a healer, or that it is unnecessary to legalize it because suicide is already a leading cause of death in the United States. John Pearson, in his article “Assisted Suicide is Unnecessary”, states that “Assisted suicide invites compromise among caregivers or family members who might have economic or otherwise selfish interests in hastening another’s death…” He goes on to mention that it is unlikely that people are capable of making such a decision in the midst of crisis or severe pain.

In 2013, 122 people had prescriptions written out to them to go through euthanasia, while 71 people actually went through with it and died from the medicine (FIND CITATION). Some people decide not to use the prescription after rethinking the idea. People have been debating for a long time on whether or not physician-assisted suicide should be legal or illegal. Some say that it is morally wrong to participate in any kind of suicide, while others say it is wrong to let terminally-ill people suffer when they have absolutely no chance at beating their disease. This is a very important controversy because people need to know all of their possible options when diagnosed with a terminally-ill disease. Patients are also supposed to make the decision of their care, and they cannot make the right decision if they cannot have all of the options. Physician-assisted suicide ought to be legalized in all states and nations to allow patients to have control of their terminal illness so they can decide whether or not they want to suffer for the rest of their short life or end it in a peaceful way.

The main argument in support of Physician assisted Suicide is that every competent individual has the right to decide on the manner in which to live life. That autonomy should also be extended to persons suffering from terminal conditions and therefore should control the timing and the manner of death they wish to face (Hawkins, 2002). Every person has the option to live quality life and avert any suffering and pain and be allowed to do in a dignified manner. Thus terminally ill patient should allowed to die in dignity without the need to face any anguish and that this autonomy must not be taken away from them.