The Legalization of Physician-Assisted Suicide Essay

Every day in the United States 1,500 people are diagnosed with a terminal illness. These people are given few options when determining if the wish to try treatment and if treatment does not work, how to deal with the end of their lives. (author unknown, “Cancer”) With this horrible future ahead of them many may wish to make amends before it’s too late, however, an increasing number of people are seeking an alternate solution. In states such as Oregon, Washington, Vermont, Montana and soon California a relatively new, legal option is available for people with terminal illnesses. The states of Oregon, Washington, Vermont, and Montana created a law which allows people with a terminal illness and less than six months that are mentally healthy seek professional medical help that will end their lives (Humphrey, Derek) . This topic has created heated debates across the United States with each side have clear and defined reason as to why or why not this controversial law should be processed for the whole country. The people who defend the law believe that people who are losing their lives should be able to leave this world on their own terms, and with the help of physicians they can go in a painless and mess-free way. Supporters also believe that by not wanting to the end it can help save patients, doctors, and insurance time and money that could be better spent on patients who may have options and may not be able to reach them without

Facts: The state of Washington passed a law that made it a crime to assist in a suicide that takes place within the state. The crime is listed as “promoting a suicide attempt” and is classified as a felony offense. In order for a person to be convicted of this crime it has to be proven that the defendant knowingly caused or aided another person in an attempt to commit suicide. In January 1994 Dr. Glucksberg along with four other doctors, three terminally ill patients who died before the case reached the

Since 5th century B.C. the concepts of physician assisted suicide have been prevalent throughout history. In Ancient Greece and Rome before the coming of Christianity many doctors believed that Physician Assisted Suicide preserved those who were dying honor 's. Even though the Hippocratic Oath stated that no doctor shall give anyone a deadly drug many doctors did not follow this. There was widespread support for voluntary death as opposed to prolonged agony and the physician compiled by giving their patients poison (Timeline). As time progressed there was more widespread support and opposition towards Physician Assisted Suicide. In 1906 bills to legalize Physician Assisted Suicide came about due to the turn of the century. At the turn of the century science had made great strides including in the field of medicine. The bill in 1906 took place in Ohio but was defeated (Timeline). The turmoil of this issue quickly receded, but in 1915 one of the first cases of letting someone die rather than trying to prolonged his or her life came about. In Chicago a mother had just gave birth to her fourth son. Her son was born with numerous defeats that in turn altered his course of life. Without surgery this newborn would not live and with surgery the chance of surviving was minimal. The doctor advised the parents of the outcomes and the parents

There are several ethical and legal issues that are raised by the majority concerning the legalization of physician assisted suicide and the role of nurses in the process. Assisted suicide is a legal act of assisting those who are suffering from a deadly illness in ending their lives by providing them the means to do it (Griffith, 2014). Netherland was the first country to legalize physician assisted suicide. In 1994, Oregon became the first state to legalize physician assisted suicide by passing a bill called “death with dignity” followed by Washington and Montana. The law states that in order to be eligible for gaining access to assisted suicide, the patient must be left with 6 months to live, signed by two physicians and mentally stable enough to make decisions. Euthanasia is an alternative term used to describe the act of putting an end to a life in order to spare the individual’s suffering from an incurable or a painful disease process. It is classified to passive, active, involuntary and voluntary euthanasia. Active euthanasia is an act that is actively done to terminate life, while passive is when treatment is stopped in order to shorten the patient’s life. Involuntary euthanasia refers to a decision that is made by the health care providers without the patient knowledge and voluntary refers to patients that knowingly request to end their lives (Levy et al, 2013).

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).

In current society, legalizing physician assisted suicide is a prevalent argument. In 1997, the Supreme Court recognized no federal constitutional right to physician assisted suicide (Harned 1) , which defines suicide as one receiving help from a physician by means of a lethal dosage (Pearson 1), leaving it up to state legislatures to legalize such practice if desired. Only Oregon and Washington have since legalized physician assisted suicide. People seeking assisted suicide often experience slanted judgments and are generally not mentally healthy. Legalization of this practice would enable people to fall victim to coercion by friends and family to commit suicide. Also, asking for death is unfair to a doctor’s personal dogma. Some

Assisted suicide, by definition, is suicide facilitated by another person, especially a physician, in order to end the life of a patient suffering from an incurable or life-threatening illness. Ever since its first use in the 1970s, physician assisted suicide has been a topic of much controversy in the modern world. Issues surrounding the life or death of a person come with many sensitive areas of concern, including financial, legal, ethical, spiritual, and medical matters. Today, physician assisted suicide has only been legalized in two states while many other states have been fighting to pass or amend the Death with Dignity Act. But while some may say that physician assisted suicide is immoral and impractical because it deserts the hope

Today, six states in the Unites States have legalized physician assisted suicide. Even though the Court concluded that there is no constitutional right to die in June of 1977, judges did not forbid states from passing laws that could enact a constitutional right to die (Lachman 1). Cases, such as the Brittany Maynard case, have led to the legalization of physician assisted suicide in some states. Brittany Maynard was diagnosed with a rapidly growing brain tumor. At that time California had not legalized physician assisted suicide, so she moved to Oregon to take the physician described medication. Maynard was applauded for her courage and sensibility. This case lead to the belief that every terminally ill patient’s death is agonizing. In addition,

Oregon, the first state to legalize PAS in 1997, passed the Death with Dignity Act (DWDA) which allowed patients to end their life by taking a lethal dose of a medication prescribed by a physician. In the article, “The Case for Physician Assisted Suicide: How Can It Possiblye Be Proven?,” the authors, E. Dahl and N. Levy, state that the proponents of PAS believe that there have been several reports of terminally ill patients abusing the DWDA which can be caused by mental illnesses or depression. Due to the possibility of physicians abusing the right to prescribe terminally ill patients lethal doses of a medication, many doubt whether physicians should play a large role in the process of PAS. In the article, “Should Psychiatrists Serve as

Physician-assisted suicide (PAS) in the United States gained national attention in the early 1990s, when Dr. Jack Kevorkian, a pathologist, conducted over 130 cases of PAS from 1990 to 1998 despite numerous arrests and eventual loss of medical licensure. His first PAS was provided to Janet Adkins, a 54-year-old woman diagnosed with early stage of Alzheimer’s disease (Schneider, 2011). Dr. Kevorkian was then charged with murder, but Michigan’s court of Appeals dropped the case on December 13, 1990, as no laws were in place regarding PAS at that time (Schneider, 2011). In each of the 130 plus cases of PAS, the individuals committed suicide with the devices designed by Dr. Kevorkian. These devices, with the control

The topic of legalizing Physician-assisted suicide (PAS) has long been a controversial issue in Canada and has recently received increased attention. In 1993, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled the provisions of the Criminal Code prohibiting assisted suicide. Two decades later, the Supreme Court of Canada began to deliberate whether to uphold or strike down the law prohibiting doctor-assisted suicide. On October 15th (What is the year), the nine justices of the Supreme Court heard impassioned pleas for overturning Canada’s absolute prohibition against assisted suicide, with proponents arguing laws that consider the act equivalent to murder are a violation of personal autonomy and infringe the Charter of Rights and Freedom that provides for “life, liberty and security of the person” (Connor, 2014). The hearing sparked fresh debates across the country. Opponents argue that legalizing physician-assisted suicide would lead society down a dangerous "slippery slope" that leads to involuntary euthanasia and the killing of people who are thought undesirable. In addition, opponents argue that legalizing physician-assisted suicide gives too much power to doctors and it may reduce the availability of palliative care. The aim of this paper is to make a comprehensive argument in favor of physician-assisted suicide.

With an advancing medical field, new technology allows doctors to do almost the impossible. Automatic genetic analysis, restoration of eyesight, and robotic limbs remain as some of the most cutting edge innovative technology in the medical field. Society witnesses the creation of even more medical breakthroughs, however, the application of new found research enhances and prolongs the quality of life for humans. A growing elderly population prompts the progression of superior palliative care and hospice care. While end of life care attempts to make the last months of a person’s life as comfortable as possible, ultimately palliative and hospice care become ineffective in helping with the excruciating pain. Thus, the legalization of physician assisted suicide provides a compassionate death while preserving the concept of patient autonomy.

It is thought that the presumed vulnerable would be left helpless if physician-assisted suicide were legalized, though evidence shows this claim is false. People presumed vulnerable to physician assisted suicide are the uninsured, the poor, people with little education, people older than 80, women, people with mental illnesses, people with physical disabilities, minors and racial and ethnic minorities. There is no evidence supporting the claim that any of these groups have been adversely affected since physician-assisted suicide was legalized in Oregon in 1997. Since the law was passed in 1997, 460 patients have died from ingesting physician prescribed medication under the Death with Dignity Act (Department of Human Services, 2010). In 2009 a total of 59 deaths were from physician-assisted suicide; 98.3 percent were white, 48.3 percent had at least a bachelors degree, 98.7 percent had health insurance, and 78 percent were between 55 and 84 years-old (Department of Human Services, 2010). These statistics clearly show the vulnerable have not been poorly affected by the legalization of physician-assisted suicide.

In 1994, Oregon became the first state to legalize assisted suicide for patients. Assisted suicide or euthanasia is the practice of intentionally ending a life in order to relieve pain and suffering. For many patients suffering from cancer and many other terminal illnesses, death can appear to be a very pleasant way to end the suffering from the sicknesses. However, only few states allow it. States including Oregon, Colorado, Vermont, Washington and California have legalized euthanasia, however did receive scrutiny. Many felt that doctors allowing and helping patients to die is a form of murder. They view it as killing the patients and giving them no chance to overcome the illness they have. Some have even debated bringing it to court. However, Euthanasia should not be prosecuted as murder because it is a safe way for the ill to die, can have a positive impact on those on life support, and is largely favored by patients and non patients in the country.

However, in reviewing the lives of people whose suicides have been publicly linked to Dr. Jack Kevorkian, a pathologist who has been behind bars since 1999, serving 10 to 25 years for second-degree murder, at least 60% of the 47 suicide patients were not terminal. At least 17 of them could have lived in definitively and 13 had no complaint of pain and in at least five of those cases, the people who died had histories of severe depression (Freep – internet).