The Death With Dignity Act

People are suffering from incurable debases or illness that can be very brutal to the patients end of life. When a patient is incurable and has the news that their end of life is extremely near, less than 6 months or in between. The patient might suffer longlines or sadness due to them having to leave behind everything they love, it’s very sad that they have to die but the pain makes and drives the patient to go with the death with dignity law that makes it easier for them to plan their death in a much better way without suffering any longer. While patients get a period of 15 days before they can proceed with the law the patient might suffering from emotional problems in between those last 15 days if they do not change their mind about the law. To provide less suffering and to give more freedom to that individual is all they are asking for. If only people could have more freedom and liberty as to decide when you get to

Once people are diagnosed to be terminally-ill, they only have a certain amount of time to live, and they know that as their disease progresses that they will only get worse and worse and they will eventually lose themselves. These people should have a choice as of whether they want to live out those dreadful days that lie ahead of them, or to simply end their lives peacefully, without any pain. Physician- Assisted Suicide or Euthanasia allows people to make the decision. Although the end-result of both procedures is the same, the technique differs slightly. In Physician- Assisted Suicide, the physician injects the lethal substances, and with Euthanasia, the doctor only provides a lethal amount of a drug to the patient and they ingest it themselves. Physician-Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia should be legalized as a federal law so that the patients have the right to decide whether they would like to end their lives when in a terminally-ill state.

Brittany Maynard was one of the people to use the Death with Dignity Act in Organ and once said,“To have control of my own mind…to go with dignity is less terrifying. When I look at both options I have to die, I feel this is far more humane” (Sandeen, 2014). No matter what, we will all eventually die, but we should have the right to die as humanely as possible. The Death with Dignity Act is an end-of-life choice possibility for terminally ill patients to be given the freedom to decide for themselves what it means to die with dignity. This act allows them to die with dignity by providing them with lethal medications prescribed by a physician (The Oregon Department of Human Services, 2006). The Death with Dignity Act started to allow people with six months or less to live, the right to die in a manner and at the time of their own choosing. Also, even though modern medicine has benefited humanity greatly, it cannot completely resolve the suffering and distress that comes with the dying process, so Death with Dignity can provide a painless end-of-life choice for suffering individuals (Humphry, 2009). Although Death with Dignity is a controversial topic I feel it can be very beneficial especially since people go through a long process just to try to get the medication and the ones that get it really need it. I chose this topic because death always has been interesting to me and I one day hope to have a career

The Death with Dignity Act was first put into use in Oregon in 1997, and was used to insure terminally ill patients had the right to decide how much suffering they endure; not the government. Since then there have been similar acts passed in California, Vermont, and Washington. Death with Dignity laws allow terminally-ill patients, who are mentally competent, choose to take medication that quickens their death. Euthanasia, or physician assisted suicide, is a very uncomfortable and very controversial topic, but it is one that needs to be discussed. The rights of the American people should include the discussion of dignity and what is considered torture or the infringement of basic human rights.

The patient must be diagnosed with a terminal disease that will lead to death within six months.

Physician-assisted suicide (PAS) occurs when a physician facilitates a patient’s death by providing the necessary means and/or information to enable the patient to perform the life-ending act (e.g. the physician provides sleeping pills and information about the lethal dose, while aware that the patient may commit suicide). [Carter, 2015]. According to Death with Dignity.org, Oregon, New Mexico, Vermont, Washington and California along with Montana who administrated the Death with Dignity act determining legality through the decision from the court. These following states are currently considering on accepting the Death with Dignity act: Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, District of Columbia, Hawaii Iowa, Kansas, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Utah and Wisconsin. Physician- assisted suicide is a very controversial act, and the determination of legality depends or ethics, laws, safety, and much more. The principles of autonomy merits the consideration of the person believing that people should get the respect making their own decisions. Should Physician Assisted Suicide be legalized with the support of the principles of autonomy?

The Death With Dignity Act (DWDA) was passed in the state of Oregon on November 8, 1994, and allowed competent, terminally ill patients 18 years old or older and were also state residents to acquire a prescription of barbiturates from a doctor to end their own life when their anguish became intolerable.6 208 individuals died under the DWDA. 36% of patients who received the lethal prescription never took them.2 This insinuates that patients dealing with immense suffering from a terminal illness at least sought control over the situation.

As in all complicated matters such as this, the law is very contradictory in this field. Social workers who are well informed about life and death issues in the light of cultural and religious beliefs and practices, advanced directives, and the legislation related to them, will be more competent in assisting clients to express their desires and to make choices that encompass their life choices. Such knowledge enhances social work intervention by empowering the elderly to use their autonomous rights related to advanced directives while helping family members, through counseling, to negotiate difficult end-of-life procedures. There are certain forms for individuals to fill out that can state that they do not want medical treatment, or now, in some states like Oregon and Washington and now California, they are implementing the Death With Dignity Act. But what does this mean for the role of social workers in this field? As social workers, we advocate for living conditions conducive to the fulfillment of basic human needs and to promote social, economic, political and cultural values and institutions that are compatible with the realization of social justice. We also expand choice and opportunity, such as in end-of-life decisions, and they promote justice (NASW 2003). However, “social workers may not personally participate in an act of suicide when acting in their professional role” (NASW, 2003, P.9). This to me needs to change, to fit the laws that are now changing so that we

People of the United States of America have basic human rights. Among them are the rights to education and democracy, freedoms of speech, thought, and expression, and the right to life. However, currently, there is no right to die present in the U.S. The right to die is defined as the right of persons to choose natural death and refuse any medical measures to prolong their lives under the circumstances of terminal illnesses and the unlikeliness of them getting well (“Right-to-die”). “Death with Dignity” laws are present in a few states such as Oregon, Washington, Vermont, California, and Montana via court decision, but these laws are still not recognized on the federal level. For a terminally ill person, it is often not an option to move to one of these states to execute the right to die since the law has strict residency requirements, including state Driver License, filed state tax returns, lease or property ownership documentation (“Public Health’s Role”). Thus, the persons, being weak physically and mentally are forced medical care to prolong their lives by reducing the quality of them without any hope for recovery. Unmanageable health care costs become a burden on the family members and loved ones of the patients. Terminally ill patients should have a choice to die on their own terms to avoid further unbearable pain, to prevent the demolition of the quality of their lives, and to stop the sufferings of their loved ones.

The group decided to do a case study on Death and Dignity Act. Through our presentation, the group discussed if Euthanasia was morally and ethically right through the eyes of Thresa Christensen. Thresa Christensen was a character from the case study in which her father decided act upon voluntary active euthanasia. As group, we thought it would be best if is Theresa Christensen spoke on from the behalf of herself as a person who supports voluntary active euthanasia. The case study project has taught me a variety of skills to understand what is morally and ethically right according to the group’s research, biblical standards of ethics, and discovering my personal ethics about euthanasia.

The “Right to die” act should be an option. If you don’t want to fight your disease or you have fought your disease for a long time “The right to die act” should be available. Paragraph four lines ten-twelve claims that “people should have the option to possess the choice to fight a noble fight or die a noble death”. Assuming that you don’t want to be bound to a hospital bed and having the ability to barely do nothing you should have “The right to die act”. Paragraph two line eight states that “Disease takes away so many choices and puts many people at the mercy of doctors and nurses.”. The terminally ill want to make their final choice before staying in a hospital bed for the rest of their life. In the case that you have no one to care for you then you should have “The right to die act.” available to you. Paragraph five lines one-three reveals to us that not all people don’t have people don’t have anyone to help them with their disease. There are a lot of people that are lonely and sick at the same time. The “right to die act” is something that should be a choice.

Death with dignity can be seen as a very sensitive subject for a lot of people and for people with certain religions. Death with dignity can be seen is a horrible thing it can be perceived is the doctors trying to do the work of God but in reality they are just trying to alleviate the pain of people who are suffering from terminal illnesses. The state of Oregon won their case against the people who started to go against them in 2005. These allow doctors to prescribe legal drugs that will slowly begin to kill people this issue was controversial because they feel like it is wrong for doctors to want to help to kill another patient but at the same time the patient could be tired of suffering and you never know what type of pain the patient may

Right to Die laws, or Death with Dignity laws, allow terminally-ill adults to voluntarily request and receive a medication that causes their death. There is a high controversy around this topic since it can also be viewed as assisted suicide. If the Right to Die proposal were to be the 2018 ballot I would vote for this law and not against it because I believe there are many reasons that this could positively impact many people.

Some argue that physician assisted suicide (PAS) or Euthanasia is murder due to the decreasing value of life and the permitting doctors to kill. Societal and law change began first in Oregon, in 1994, when the Death with Dignity Act was passed. This act allows an Oregon resident, that has a terminal illness and fits a specific criteria, to have a lethal dose of medication to end their suffering. To date, five other states have joined Oregon in the legalization of physician assisted suicide in the United States. Leading to the question of, “why have the other states refused to join the six states that has legalized euthanasia?” Simultaneously, most states will answer with, “it is still murder,

Thesis Statement: A terminally ill person should have the option to die with dignity—something that is currently only afforded to the terminally ill in five U.S. states via aid in dying laws.