Terminally Ill Patients Should Choose When They Die

If there was absolutely no possibility of recovery, and the patient was suffering nearly everyday, the avenue of assisted suicide should be presented and given merit. With no possible way to avoid problems, issues arise for every possible situation, as assisted suicide is sometimes viewed as the easy way out. Large amounts of planning, assisted suicide by no means is easy though the drugs are roughly one hundred dollars (ProCon). The patient must come to terms with what will happen if they do not take this path, and also assess what will happen if they go this way. Pain and suffering could follow them around until they die or they could leave their family on a good note. Through assisted suicide, they could spend time with their family

Terminally ill patients should be allowed to do whatever they wish, for they are going to die anyway. If they want to cut that string a little earlier than the scheduled and having to deal with that pain, then they should be allowed that medication that will end their life in a painless way. It is selfish to keep someone who is going through so much pain, that they want to die, alive and forcing them to ‘just deal with it’ as if it was nothing. As if they were not already going to die. We, the United States, ‘put down’ 2.4 million healthy cats and dogs every thirteen seconds, so if we can kill so many animals because they have no home or are overpopulated, like we are, then should we not be allowed to ‘put down’ our own life without much of a problem?

I will be explaining as being a judge how I will prosecute a doctor that gave a lethal dose of morphine to a patient who was dying from terminal cancer (Pollack, 2017). The doctor wants to have a bench trial but the family, most of the public, and myself as the judge believe that individuals should be allowed to choose when to die. The prosecutor believes that if there is a law in place that makes what the doctor did a crime it should be enforced. The dilemma for myself as the judge is should I hear the case.

When people get sick, they usually make an appointment to see their primary care physician, and if the symptoms are unbearable or persist they usually go to the hospital. Although most people expect to hear they will have a positive prognosis for whatever is ailing them, some people are told that they have a terminal disease, which can potentially increase their pain and suffering. For good reason, most people are scared to die. However, when a person hears that they are going to die an agonizing death, some people are willing to embrace death to end their suffering, preserve their dignity, and enjoy their remaining time and quality of life. For example, Brittney Maynard a recently married school teacher opted for physician-assisted suicide rather than live her remaining days in agonizing pain (Egan, Fowler, and Keating 66). In contrast to physician-assisted suicide, some people prefer to utilize all available resources, testing, and procedures in the hopes that they can spend more time with their family; or they are hoping that the doctors are wrong, and they will be cured.

Terminally ill patients should have the right to die. I support their decision they know what’s best for themselves. I support this legislation because I’ve lost two family members to colon cancer. My grandpa when I was younger but don’t remember to much about him. Also, my uncle I’ve lost that I do remember everything that has happened to him. I was in high school when my uncle was diagnosed with colon cancer. He was a big guy, very tan, black hair, and was a very happy person he was the best. After a few weeks, have passed he dropped so much weight I couldn’t even recognize him anymore.

While examining the issue related to end-of-life decisions raise both legal and ethical concerns. The issues may be accountable by a number of issues like who the patient is, who has legal competence to determine what course of action is in the best interest of the patient, Pennsylvania state laws, the values of the patient or the patients parents, and the counselor of the patient providing the services. Standard A.9.c reports counselors have the option to break or not break confidentiality in this situation. Throughout the decision making process, Clinical Mental Health counselors need to be engaged in consultation or supervision since the professional has legal, ethical, and moral dirty to warn when the suspect their client may be in danger (Newsome, Gladding, Pg. 68)

Critically ill patients should be allowed to end their life because they have freedom to choose how to end their life.

On November 1, 2014 Californian resident, the 29 year-old Brittany Maynard died. What was so special about her, many may ask. Brittany death was not like any other death, she made the decision to end her life after been diagnose with a terminal brain cancer. Knowing her fate was seal, she decided to move to Oregon which was one of the state that enable in 1997 the “Death with Dignity Act”, to die with dignity. Brittany did not want to subject herself and her family to purposeless prolong pain and suffering at the hand of an incurable disease. (John)

As Americans, we are granted rights in this country and these rights, according to the Declaration of Independence, grant us “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness”. So tell me why someone that is terminally ill cannot use these rights to end their life of pain and suffering. Some states have rallied and given those who are terminally ill the right to die. However, some simply see this means of ending a life, inhumane, unethical, immoral, and just plain wrong. As a citizen of the United States where we simply have our rights, should we not be granted the right to die?

Most people have thought about the way they would die, and hoped that it would be painless, no one wants to suffer. As of now, physician assisted suicide is legal in five states. A patient is given the option to be prescribed a medicine to end their life, there are certain requirements for a patient to meet in order to be eligible to follow through on their choice. It is necessary that he or she is 18 years or older, can make decisions over their health care, and that they are diagnosed with a illness that will result in death in up to six months. Although physician assisted suicide can be thought of as immoral and dangerous, it is important because it puts patients in control and out of their suffering, for these

Mortality requires all of us to eventually face death, although when or in what way we do not know. Let’s say you are given two choices: to choose to die earlier but in a peaceful way, or to prolong your life for an unknown amount of time but endure a painful and slow death. For terminally ill patients, this unfortunately is not a hypothetical situation, but a reality of their life, except the majority of them are denied the first option. Some terminal diseases, such as Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ASL, or more popularly known as Lou Gehrig’s Disease), brain cancers, or other neural or muscular degenerative diseases often lead their victims down a unimaginable, unrelenting, brutal, road to death. Is it morally right to deny the victims of these diseases the option of an early, but peaceful death upon their request? Should we force a death filled with suffering upon a terminal patient, or allow them the option of how the last days of their life should play out? Euthanasia, or the killing of a sick person out of mercy, is a largely debated topic in present day, but this has not always been so. It gives these sick patients the option of death to avoid imminent suffering in their later death. Throughout history, the taboo of assisted suicide has changed in different eras, largely due to the authority of religion in history, and later from religion to morals. The issue at present is still an issue of morality, but also about rights; not only a right to live, but also a

My idea on should terminally –ill patients continue to receive all available medical treatment or should they only receive medical care oriented to reducing pain/suffering during their final months. Am not too sure of which decide I would go for because I have not been in a situation like that, where I had to make a big deicide like that. But I would want someone I know to continue receiving medical treatment until it’s that time for them to go. But if they refusing to take treatment that another thing. By them continue receiving medical care they might get better, god work in mysterious way and anything could happen.

The knowledge that an illness is causing the patient’s body to slowly give up can be too much to mentally handle for some. Terminal illnesses are permanent, meaning that the patient will not recover at any point in their life. If they are not going to recover, why make them wait out death? Why not let them take the control from the illness and decide what will happen to themselves? Suicide assisted by a doctor could help end a patient's suffering and allow them to feel a sense of control within their life again.

Over the course of the semester, we have covered many interesting topics in this class. However, the one that I continually struggled to form a solid opinion on, and sincerely had to ponder what my decisions would be in the given situations, was the topic of end of life choices. My own personal thoughts and beliefs would conflict with my religious following, and my mind would continually change on such topics as whether or not physician assisted suicide should be legal, or whether or not I would want to keep living in a persistent vegetative state in the hope of a miracle recovery. I still struggle forming an unyielding position, but the information we have learned in this class has helped me learn more on these

“Many people who are terminally ill decide to die with dignity and avoid the suffering for them, and their family.” Isaias Lozano. When you read this, you suddenly question yourself, would you do it or would you not? Considering this, Id probably be part of that percentage of the population that if it comes to that point would like to end it.