The Death Of Terminally Ill Patients

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.

Voluntary Euthanasia has been considered a controversial topic for many decades. The idea of committing an act that involves the taking of human life is not one that many people would care to discuss openly. The main argument is that a person who has been diagnosed with an incurable illness and is in extreme pain and their ability to move has been limited, while that person still has control over their destiney should they be allowed take their own life (Bowie, R.2001). The worldwide debate weather one should be allowed to end a life is still one of the biggest ethical issues. The attempt to providing the rights of the individual is in conflict with the moral values of society. Voluntary Euthanasia has been highly rejected by many religious and pro-life institutions.

Some individuals with terminal illnesses find solace in knowing that they can exert some power over their illnesses and choose how they want to die. Just as any individual has the legal right to plan out their healthcare wishes and ensure that their end-of-life concerns are taken care of, terminally ill patients should also have the right to have the choice to want to die naturally or end their lives. Legalizing physician-assisted suicide can give the dying individual comfort in knowing that they have options. Physicians presently are allowed to relieve the dying of their pain and suffering by administering lethal doses of pain medications. Terminally ill patients should be able to access lethal doses of medicine voluntarily through their physician to allow them the choice of death. Strong morals and ethics surrounding this issue have split society on whether or not physician-assisted suicide should be legalized across the United States. Nevertheless, the diagnosis of a terminal illness can create feelings of uncertainty, fear and helplessness and therefore, physician-assisted suicide laws should be passed nationwide to be able to give those who are dying of

Many people have different opinions on the debate of legalizing Euthanasia or Physician- assisted suicide. “The term assisted suicide has several different interpretations. Perhaps the most widely used and accepted is "the intentional hastening of death by a terminally ill patient with assistance from a doctor, relative, or another person". Some people will insist that something along the lines of "in order relieve intractable (persistent, unstoppable) suffering" needs to be added to the meaning, “(2) The major debate on euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide are: the slippery slope to legalized murder, the right to die, and the Hippocratic oath and prohibition of killing. “Proponents of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (PAS) contend that terminally ill people should have the right to end their suffering with a quick, dignified, and compassionate death. They argue that the right to die is protected by the same constitutional safeguards that guarantee such rights as marriage, procreation, and the refusal or termination of life-saving medical treatment.” (1) I

End of life care is a prevailing issue in the United States that affects the terminally ill. It includes physician-assisted suicide, which is legal in five states and the practice of euthanasia which is illegal. (Barone, 2014). Delving deeper into the issue of end of life care reveals that this issue affects far more than the patient that is suffering. It raises the question of whether or not it is acceptable to reject the request of a person based solely on the socio-religious values of protecting life and ignoring the moral responsibility of ending the misery of another person even when they explicitly ask to end their suffering. Terminally ill, elderly, or disabled patients that are aware of the physical and mental deterioration caused

In recent years, the matter of assisted suicide for terminal patients has been the topic of many moral and medical debates. Opinions vary greatly, and stand on wholly opposite spectrums. Some people say that a patient should be allowed to decide when they die. However, others believe that morals and medicinal ethics dominate over a patient's desire. My opinion is that is that no medical institution should be allowed to provide assisted suicide, even if it’s for terminally ill patients. There are many reason why I think so.

Life can be a long, treacherous journey filled with many blessings, disappointments, surprises, and failures. However, the only thing guaranteed in our unpredictable lives is that one day each of us will meet our death. According to the Mariam Webster’s Dictionary, euthanasia is ‘the act or practice of killing someone who is very sick or injured in order to prevent any more suffering.’ Understandably, one suffering from a terminal illness such as AIDS, cancer, or Alzheimer’s, may think it best to put an end to their agony as soon as possible. Although it can be argued that there may be good intentions in carrying out this “mercy killing”, they do not change the fact that euthanasia is murder and should remain illegal in the United States of America.

Assisted suicide is becoming a widespread topic among elderly and terminally ill patients in America. It straddles the line between having the moral right to choose to die versus the ethical decision to maintain life at all cost. Through modern medicine is having breakthroughs with lifesaving procedure and medications on a daily basis, we are now posed with the question “Does Society have a moral obligation to protect and preserve all life?” We can talk about dignity and respect or even the person’s right to choose but in situations where we are under duress, we can make hasty decisions involving our lives. I believe that all lives should be perceive as precious and no one should have the right to assist someone with ending their life.

There are many causes of death, and some of the individuals who lay on their deathbed suffering will often wish to hasten their passing. To be exact, it is about the terminally ill patients and the agony they are facing. Terminally ill patients go through massive amounts of medication, all sorts of therapy, and unimaginable pain. Because of this, the patient will often ask their physician to help them commit suicide. In 2014, Brittany Maynard, 29, was diagnosed with terminal brain cancer and is a known person that died by prescribed lethal drugs under the Death With Dignity Act that the state of Oregon passed in November of 1997. It is the only law in the United States that legalized physician-assisted suicide. With this law, terminally ill patients have been given a certain amount of time to live and decide to end their life are given prescribed medication by two doctors that cause the patient to accelerate their death. According to a Ethnics report by Medscape in 2014, about 21,000 doctors from the U.S. and Europe were asked to answer a series of questions in a survey, one of the questions being "Should physician-assisted suicide be allowed?" After tallying up the votes, about 54% of the doctors said yes to this question (Medscape). The issue of physician-assisted suicide (PAS) has been in the world of medicine for years, with both sides explaining their views. There are those who are concerned that physician-assisted suicide is unjustifiable and goes against the

Close your eyes and picture a person is connennected to feeding tubes, laying in soiled linens, heavily sedated, and bed ‘ridden; everyday they are faced with a constant reminder of their loss of control and impending death. There are several activities that terminally ill patients are unable to do to care for themselves. While caring for patients, the expense can grow astronomically. Man’s abilities to sustain life does not dictate God’s will to end life. Terminally ill patients should have the right to decide when it is time for their life to end.

The terminally ill patient’s death is imminent, isn’t death a natural cause of universe, imminent for all and not limited to the terminally ill? While euthanasia might be “Mercy Killing”, it does not differentiate it from an act of murder and neither and thus not justify. Euthanasia is the intentional killing of a patient for the patient’s sake either passive by withholding or withdrawing treatment or active through direct involvement. This subject is a controversial topic debated for quite some time. Although it is legal in less than 10 countries, by taking into consideration the physician’s frequent involvement with the terminally ill. It is evident that soon this number will increase as more physicians fight to legalize euthanasia.

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.

Nowadays, with the rapid and dramatic development in medicine and technology physicians has the ability to save more lives than was possible back in the day. Unfortunately, cure for certain diseases has not been able to develop. Those patients in this condition has no other option than to wait for their death. Many patients in this condition seek self-suicide to stop the pain. It’s a delicate process not every state in the united State allow this procedure to happen. California is one of the state that support this initiative called “Assisted suicide”. It allows Physician to end the life of a terminally ill patient only if it’s requested by the patient. The rules for the consent of the aid-dying drug, varies from each states, but it mainly involves a prescription from a licensed physician approved by the state in which patient reside. For example in California, the patient shall submit two oral requests to a minimum of fifteen days apart, and a written request directly to it attending physician. (CNN, October 6, 2015)

The moral principle of the right to die, is a way of thinking where a human being has the choice to end their life on their own terms. The right to die, also known as physician assisted suicide, is heavily contemplated in patients who are diagnosed as terminally ill. Being diagnosed as terminally ill may come at any point in one’s life. Once a patient is given this news it puts a greater weight on their shoulders as now they must adjust to accommodate a new reality. Many patients fear that their near future will consist of becoming a burden to their family members financially as well as mentally, since they may not be able to afford the medical bills. Those who are terminally ill may worry that they are not going to be able to control their level of pain when it worsens as their physical condition deteriorates. With the diagnosis of a terminal disease many believe what follows will be unnecessary suffering that is brought on by the symptoms, many of which individuals would avoid at all costs. Currently there are only four states that have the Right to Die Law enacted; California, Oregon, Washington, and Vermont. Within these states patients have the option of physician assisted suicide, if their medical condition meets certain requirements to obtain this option. Terminally ill patients who live outside of these four states do not have the option of physician assisted suicide available to them. In this position paper I argue, that enacting a National Right to Die Law in the

Medical advancements and improved living conditions worldwide have increased the life span of our population (U.S. Department of State, 2015). As a result, many individuals are now living with degenerative or chronic ailments that require increased support (Vissers et al., 2013). Unfortunately, these illnesses often come with a “diminished quality of life” (Butler, Tiedemann, Nicol, & Valiquet, 2013). These issues have brought forth the euthanasia debate, which poses the question, “Should an individual have the right to choose to die?”