The Ambiguity Of Suicide

Imagine laying in a hospital bed living everyday in extreme pain with no hope of getting better. This scenario explains what many people go through everyday, which is a living with a terminal illness. M. Lee, a science historian, and Alexander Stingl a sociologist, define terminal illness as “an illness from which the patient is not expected to recover even with treatment. As the illness progresses death is inevitable” (1). There are not many options for the terminally ill besides dying a slow and painful death, but assisted suicide could be best option for these patients. Assisted suicide is “any case in which a doctor gives a patient (usually someone with a terminal illness) the means to carry out their own suicide by using a lethal dose of medication” (Lee and Stingl 1). Some feel that assisted suicide is unnecessary because it is too great of a controversy and will only cause problems in society. However, assisted suicide should be legal in the United States as long as there are strict regulations to accompany it.

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

There has been an increase in the interest of euthanasia and assisted suicide for the terminally ill in recent years (Williams 1997). The most obvious reason for someone wanting to end their life is to end the suffering they are going through once the illness goes beyond being bearable.

Matthew Paris explains in his article “Soon We Will Accept That Useless Lives Should End,” published in the Spectator, that dying is not a desire for the patients with a terminal illness. Terminally ill patients end their life because they did not receive pleasure from the life that they had. Pleasure was taken away in their lives when the pain and suffering took over. Patients who are labeled with a terminal illness lose their quality of life quick. There are many cases in which patients would much rather choose an assisted death over living in pain. In Brittany Maynard’s article, she describes the suffering that she endured in her battle with brain cancer. Even though Brittany’s cancer was labeled terminal, she still had many surgeries. When given her prognosis of six months, she knew her quality of life would rapidly diminish. She went through with physician assisted suicide for many reasons, one of them being that she did not want to suffer anymore. The same article displays a perfect reasoning as to how physician assisted suicide ends suffering for the patient. Brittany Maynard chose physician assisted suicide to escape the pain and suffering that she would soon face. Having full brain radiation would leave her scalp with first-degree burns. Even if Brittany chose hospice care, the tumor developing in her brain would eat away at her mind and she

The ethical dilemma of this highly controversial subject will continue to split our approach to the notion of assisted suicide. As we age, we come to terms with our own mortality, how we choose to leave this world isn’t always up us. For those who suffer from a terminal fate, maybe they should have the choice, and those who understand their current condition can provide them the dignity they deserve without repercussions. The only way we as a society can move ahead, is to find a common

The conclusion of going through with the medicalization of the patient’s suicide could help he or she to avoid becoming “vulnerable to suggestions from family members that they could make everyone 's life easier by ending their own” (“Death” 2) in a more forceful way than perhaps a lethal injection in a hospital.

Many people have been faced with having to deal with hard truths of both life and death. One of these decisions that can be fronted to a person with a terminal illness may be what to do next. With what can be considered looming doom, one has to ingest the decisions of self, family and the pain that lies ahead. The debate over physician assisted suicide has been a long time argument wielding both positive and negative views exactly how a person should proceed once a decision has been made. Three questions are often asked in the attempt to argue the case for physician assisted suicide, that of legality, ethicalness, and morality. In the long run, the debate between the cause, effect and personal ideology that is social

Millions of people suffer from terminal illnesses and diseases everyday. Many of those people, especially those living in uncomfortable facilities and those deteriorating, have a strong desire to die with dignity. The subject of physician assisted suicide goes hand in hand with self induced suicide and euthanasia. The issue with physician assisted suicide is that society is not willing to help the issue because a majority of society views it as unethical and morally wrong. The subject is more so focused on the practice of the doctor rather than the pain and the suffering of the

Death is not a topic that many people are comfortable with, some people believe it is outrageous for others to play God and decide when to end their lives. While this is true for people with normal pains, there are those who feel they have the right to choose their own fate because they cannot bear their pain and suffering anymore. These are people that are terminally ill, people who were diagnosed with a deadly disease without a cure and feel that death is the only way to relieve that pain. These people has gone through many treatments that are slowly becoming less and less effective. Even though the treatment isn’t working, the patients still have to live through the pain from the treatments. Terminally ill

The “Right to Die” (Euthanasia) should be further looked into as an option for terminally ill patients and not considered unethical. There has been an issue concerning the topic of “Human Euthanasia” as an acceptable action in society. The research compiled in conjunction with an educated opinion will be the basis for the argument for voluntary Euthanasia in this paper. Patients suffering from an incurable illness, exhausting all medical treatments, should be given the freedom of choice to continue their path of suffering or end it at their own will. “The Right to die” is not suicide, as you are fully aware that death will be certain, as Euthanasia spares the individual of additional pain.

Although a patient’s choice of suicide symbolizes an expression of self-determination, there is a great distinction between denying life-sustaining treatments and demanding life-ending treatments. The right to self-determination is a right to allow or reject offered treatments, not to choose what should be offered. The right to refuse life-sustaining interventions does not correlate with a right to force others to hasten their death. The inability of physicians to inhibit death does not mean that physicians are allowed to help induce death.

Our society finds it difficult to talk about dying and euphemisms are the norm. It is typical for both doctors and patients to be hesitant to initiate a discussion on dying. Focus instead is often more often placed on interventions and actions for managing symptoms. This avoidance can leave patients and their families unprepared for the inevitable death. (Schapira, 2010) It also often results in requests for therapies which may be excessive, costly and even painful in the hopes for a cure. One study demonstrates that when patients are aware that they are terminally ill, the majority are able to reach a state of peacefulness and also exhibit lower levels of distress. (Ray, Block, Friedlander, Zhang, Maciejewski & Prigerson, 2006) It is also important that family members are willing to discuss end-of-life options with their loved ones. According to elderly patients, they are most often the ones who initiate these conversations with their

The deliberate act of ending another 's life, given his or her consent, is formally referred to as euthanasia. At present, euthanasia is one of the most controversial social-ethical issues that we face, in that it deals with a sensitive subject matter where there is much uncertainty as to what position one ought to take. Deliberately killing another person is presumed by most rational people as a fundamental evil act. However, when that person gives his or her consent to do so, this seems to give rise to an exceptional case. This can be illustrated in the most common case of euthanasia, where the person who is willing to die suffers from an illness that causes great pain, and will result in his or her demise in the not-so-distant future.

     Once having a mere glimpse into the lives of the terminally ill or disabled, some are able to understand their plight; but usually most are not. In most cases, these people are able to take what they've been given and deal with it. However, in some cases, some simply can not tolerate their lives as they are. They feel that the only solution to their problem is to end their lives. Unfortunately, in some cases, the terminally ill or disabled are not capable of accomplishing this task by themselves, and are left trapped in a life that they do not want. In these cases, when one wishes to end his life and is terminally ill, disabled, or otherwise unable to do so independently, he should have the right to die by assisted suicide. Although most people that are terminally ill or disabled do not wish to end their lives, there are still those few who do. While examining the issue of assisted suicide, three facets of the controversy must be considered: the political, the moral, and the human or compassionate views. By supporting their decision, we support their right to choose and decide what they want to do with their bodies and their lives, we do not

Such a controversial topic as euthanasia and physician assisted suicide obviously brings about both proponents and opponents. When it comes to the case of a terminally ill person who is fully competent, how can one say no to his desire in having